Environmental Weeds of The Wet Tropics

ENVIRONMENTAL WEEDS OF THE WET TROPICS
BIOREGION: RISK ASSESSMENT & PRIORITY RANKING

Garry Werren
January 2001
Report prepared for the Wet Tropics Management Authority, Cairns
Rainforest CRC January 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
An examination of the issue of alien plant species invasions of the Wet Tropics
Bioregion was conducted in order to consider management implications for the
Wet Tropics of Queensland World Heritage Area. The terms of reference for the
project comprised the development of a computer-based weed Risk Assessment
System encompassing (i) inventory of existing weeds, plants presently found in
the region that may constitute sleeper weeds and plants not presently found in
the region that are proven environmental weeds in similar environments
elsewhere; (ii) prioritisation of potential environmental threat based on
explicit biogeographic/historical and biological/ecological criteria; (iii)
categorisation into management categories - eg, species targeted for prevention,
eradication and containment control; and (iv) consideration of appropriate
management actions.
This Report presents a review of Risk Assessment Systems (RASs) currently
being applied or developed with the view to formulating a robust system to screen
alien species that have naturalised within the bioregion. Systems reviewed were:
(1) RASs for Preventative Quarantine Purposes ie, International protocols (FAO
1996, 1998a, 1998b);Prevention or minimisation of risk of introductions to
countries with comparable habitats/vulnerabilities (eg, Virtue et al. in press,
Williams et al. in press); Australian protocols (Pheloung 1995, Steinke & Walton
1999); State initiatives various (eg, Hall 1999, Keighery 1999, Carter 2000); and
(2) RASs for Prioritising Existing Weed Incursions
- ie, Exotic Species
Ranking System (ESRS) of US Department of Interior, National Parks Service
(Hiebert & Stubbendieck 1993); Australian WRA Protocol Details (Pheluong
1995, Virtue et al. in press); Wildland Weed Priority Ranking System of US
Nature Conservancy (Randall et al., in press); Weed Risk Assessment in Hawaii
(Teytaud 1998; Thomas, in press); Weed Risk Assessment in the Galapagos
Islands (Tye, in press); Determination of Weeds of National Significance
(WONS) (Thorp 1999); and Weed Assessment Scoresheet of the Animal and
Plant Control Commission of South Australia (Virtue 2000). The rationale
behind the proposed Wet Tropics RAS, which was derived from existing
systems, is considered, pending its acceptance and application by the Wet Tropics
Management Authority.
The Queensland Herbariums HERBRECS list of naturalised species occurring
within the region was refined by (i) concatenating closely related taxa; (ii)
incorporating nomenclatural changes and taxonomic revisions; and (iii) by adding
those species known to have naturalised but which have not been incorporated
officially due to lack of collection, etc. This resulted in a list of at least 504
species of exotic (alien) plants that have established self-maintaining populations
in the Wet Tropics.
This Report contains a preliminary ranking, employing the proposed RAS, of
57 wet tropics weed species. These were drawn from a list of 26 terrestrial
species compiled by DNR (Land Protection), including a single native species,
supplemented with a further 24 representing a variety of other taxonomic and life
Wet Tropics Weed Risk Assessment
Page i
form groups, together with seven naturalised aquatics. They are thus a sample
embracing those major weeds that have already been identified by a range of
interest groups. This then is addressing an existing problem of target species for
priority control.
The two species that ranked highest were Annona glabra (Pond Apple) and
Leucaena leucocephala (Leucaena). The former is classified as a Weed of
National Significance, while the latter has demonstrated gross weedy tendencies
overseas and is among the 32 land plants in the list of the worlds 100 worst
invasive species.
Species that ranked next highest comprised: Chromolaena odorata (Siam Weed),
Sphagneticola trilobata (Singapore Daisy), Miconia calvescens (Miconia),
Hymenachne amplexicaulis (Hymenachne), Psidium guajava ( G u a v a ) ,
Thunbergia spp. (includes Blue Trumpet Vine), Mikania micrantha (Mile-aminute), Brachiaria mutica (Par Grass) and Panicum maximum (Guinea
Grass).
Several are also included amongst the worlds worst alien invaders. All have
exhibited extremely aggressive weedy tendencies elsewhere and/or are currently
extremely aggressive weeds of the region, and, in the case of Hymenachne, Par
Grass and Guinea Grass, are very aggressive and greatly impair ecosystem
function. These are considered to be transformer species ie, invasive species
that can change the character, condition, form or nature of a natural ecosystem
over a substantial area
Some consideration was given to weed management issues, although for
management there are many other considerations beyond ecological risk.
Therefore, management feasibility screening of species is argued to constitute the
next phase of the assessment process. There is some indication that others are in
the early stages of invasion (ie, prior to exponential rates of increase) and likely
constitute sleeper weeds deserving of early detection and eradication. Arguably
the first management action is to seek an embargo on further exotic species
introductions to the region and agency cooperation in the cessation of
promotion of perceived useful species such as Leucaena that already have
proven to be major environmental weeds.
The Report also presents recommendations for further research. These
include:
peer review and sensitivity testing of the Wet Tropics RAS;
procuring additional biological/ecological information on the remaining

naturalised exotics and their assessment using the RAS;
mapping of infestations especially high scoring weeds with comparatively

limited distributions in the region to assist management deliberations; and,
formulation of a secondary screening system to explicitly take into account

feasibility, costs and strategic matters associated with weed control and
eradication.
Page ii
ENVIRONMENTAL WEEDS OF THE WET TROPICS BIOREGION:

RISK ASSESSMENT & PRIORITY RANKING
Garry Werren
Rainforest CRC, JCU (Cairns Campus)
January 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0
INTRODUCTION
2.0
BACKGROUND
2.1
2.2
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
2.3
2.4
3
6
7
7
8
10
2.5
INVASION ECOLOGY
SUBJECT AREA
CLIMATE
PHYSIOGRAPHY, GEOLOGY AND SOILS
LANDSCAPE CONFIGURATION AND NATIVE VEGETATION COVER
CONSIDERATION OF PECULIARITIES OF THE HOST ENVIRONMENT
PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION OF WEEDS WITHIN THE WET TROPICS
BIOREGION
CONSIDERATION OF LANDSCAPE COMPONENTS AT RISK
3.0
WEED RISK ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS
15
3.1
3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.1.4
3.2
3.2.1
RAS FOR PREVENTATIVE QUARANTINE PURPOSES

15
15
INTERNATIONAL PROTOCOLS (FAO 1996, 1998A, 1999)
PREVENTION/MINIMISATION OF RISK OF INTRODUCTIONS TO VARIOUS COUNTRIES 16
17
AUSTRALIAN PROTOCOLS (PHELOUNG 1995)
18
STATE INITIATIVES
19
RAS FOR PRIORITISING EXISTING WEED INCURSIONS
EXOTIC SPECIES RANKING SYSTEM OF US DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR NATIONAL
PARKS SERVICE (HIEBERT & STUBBENDIECK 1993)
21
22
AUSTRALIAN WRAS PROTOCOL DETAILS (PHELUONG 1995)
WILDLAND WEED PRIORITY RANKING SYSTEM OF US NATURE CONSERVANCY
(RANDALL ET AL., IN PRESS)
24
26
WEED RISK ASSESSMENT IN HAWAII (TEYTAUD 1998; THOMAS, IN PRESS)
28
WEED RISK ASSESSMENT IN THE GALAPAGOS ISLANDS (TYE IN PRESS)
ASSESSMENT TO DETERMINE WEEDS OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE (WONS)
30
(WWW.WEEDS.ORG.AU ; THORP 1999)
WEED ASSESSMENT SCORESHEET OF THE ANIMAL AND PLANT CONTROL
COMMISSION OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA (VIRTUE 2000)
31
34
BASIC ELEMENTS OF A WEED RAS
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.2.4
3.2.5
3.2.6
3.2.7
3.3
13
14
4.0
TAILORING A WEED RISK ASSESSMENT SYSTEM FOR THE WET
TROPICS BIOREGION
36
4.1
37
INSIGHTS INTO WEED INVASIONS IN THE TROPICS
Page iii
4.2
4.3
4.4
CONSIDERATION OF INTRINSIC (BIOLOGICAL) TRAITS

CONSIDERATION OF EXTRINSIC FACTORS
RANKING METHODOLOGY
37
38
40
5.0
EVALUATION OF PLANT SPECIES NATURALISED WITHIN THE
WET TROPICS BIOREGION
5.1
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.2
5.2.1
5.2.2
5.2.3
44
EMENDATIONS TO CURRENT LIST OF REGIONALLY NATURALISED SPECIES

ADDITIONAL INCLUSIONS
EXCLUSIONS
EXISTING SPECIES THAT POSE MAJOR AREA MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS
NATURAL GROUPS OF NATURALISED SPECIES BASED ON HABIT/LIFE FORMS
NATURAL GROUPS OF NATURALISED SPECIES BASED ON ORIGINS
OTHER GROUPS OF NATURALISED SPECIES BASED ON PREDISPOSITION TO
44
44
44
46
47
49
50
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
INVADE SYSTEMS AT RISK

GROUPS OF NATURALISED SPECIES RESULTING FROM APPLICATION OF THE RAS
TO THE SAMPLE
CONSIDERATION OF AQUATIC WEEDS
CONSIDERATION OF THE WORST TERRESTRIAL WEEDS
ASSESSMENT RESULTS AND WEEDS OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE(WONS)
CONSIDERATION OF SLEEPER WEEDS
50
53
53
55
55
6.0
CONSIDERATION OF IMPLICATIONS FOR WEED MANAGEMENT
57
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
57
58
59
6.5
PREVENTION OF WEED ENTRY

THE IMPORTANCE OF EARLY INTERVENTION
THE IMPORTANCE OF ECOLOGICALLY INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT
THE IMPORTANCE OF CONTROL OR CONTAINMENT OF EXISTING WEED
PROBLEMS
RESEARCH REQUIREMENTS
7.0
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
62
5.2.4
60
61
BIBLIOGRAPHY
64
APPENDIX 1 PROJECT SPECIFICS
A1-1
APPENDIX 2 EMENDED LIST OF EXOTIC PLANTS THAT HAVE

NATURALISED WITHIN THE WET TROPICS BIOREGION ARRANGED
ALPHABETICALLY BY FAMILY
A2-1
APPENDIX 3 REGIONALLY NATURALISED SPECIES DATABASE
(CD)
APPENDIX 4 ENVIRONMENTAL WEED RISK ASSESSMENT IN THE WET

TROPICS PRESENTATION
(CD)
Page iv
Biological diversity faces many threats throughout the world. One of the
major threats to native biological diversity is now acknowledged by scientists
and governments to be biological invasions caused by alien invasive species.
The impacts of alien invasive species are immense, insidious, and usually
irreversible. They may be as damaging to native species and ecosystems
on a global scale as the loss and degradation of habitats.
SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group of IUCN (2000)
Page v
1.0
Introduction
Lvei (1997:627), noting that the scale of species introduction has vastly increased,
argued that alien species invasion must be recognised as an important component of
human-induced global change and as a serious threat to biodiversity. Introduction of
alien organisms frequently produces drastic impacts on the receiving biota and
systems. Long term global effects comprise both decreasing the local distinctiveness
of floras and faunas and the breaking down of geographic isolation that promotes and
maintains global biodiversity generally. In fact, Willis et al. (2000:275) claim that
threat to biodiversity posed by alien species invasions is second only to habitat loss.
It is estimated (Virtue et al. in press) that approximately 15% of the vascular flora of
Australia (or over 2 200 species) has been introduced. Those introductions have been
both deliberate (ie, for purposes of agricultural production, ornamental amenity and for
other reasons) and accidental (as in contaminants in imported pasture seed or stock, via
various modes of human transport, and the like). A significant subset of these exotic
species has subsequently naturalised in the new host environment to impose major
impacts on Australian ecosystems, both natural/semi-natural and anthropogenic
(including intensive agro-ecosystems and extensive rangelands). These subsets are
referred to as environmental and agricultural weeds respectively.
The vascular flora of the Wet Tropics Bioregion alone, is estimated to be 4 664 species
(WTMA 2000:25). With a total of 508 exotic taxa noted by the Queensland Herbarium
to be naturalised within the region (see Appendix 2 below) which itself is a likely
underestimate (see Section 5.5.1) this amounts to almost 11% of the regions native
flora. Despite the exotic component being a slightly lower proportion than the national
average (Virtue et al., in press), the existence of a high level of endemism and the fact
that much of the region (approximately 9 000 km2) has been inscribed on the World
Heritage list as the Wet Tropics of Queensland World Heritage Area (Werren & King
1991) predicates a high priority on weed control within area management. This has
prompted the present initiative for the development of an environmental weed risk
assessment system (RAS) for the Wet Tropics Region as a means of contributing to
the meeting of Australias international obligations under the World Heritage
Convention. The RAS will incorporate an ecologically based, logistically and
economically feasible system for identifying priorities for weed prevention,
eradication, containment or control.
While there are many pests of the agricultural and pastoral industry and others
(particularly ponded pasture species) that constitute both pests of agricultural and
natural systems, it is the environmental weed component that is the subject of the
current investigation. Environmental weeds are defined as introduced species
capable of establishing, or are considered to have a high probability of establishing
self-sustaining populations by invading native communities or ecosystems and are
capable of causing major modification to species richness, abundance or ecosystem
function (Goosem 1993). Williams & West (2000:429) note that these can come in all
shapes and sizes, and grow in all niches in an ecosystem. This component includes
(i) plants that have already demonstrated a capacity to institute such changes within the
region and (ii) others that occur in the region and, due to certain inherent traits or
because of their demonstrated weediness elsewhere, constitute potential threats to native
communities and ecosystems. The latter might be referred to as sleeper weeds (Groves
1999).
Page 1
It is proposed to adopt terminology consistent with that employed by Richardson et al.

(2000) within this report. This avoids the plethora of confusing ascriptions - eg,
immigrants vs aliens to describe benign vs serious weeds respectively (Bazzaz
1986:97) - and the various synonyms and synonymous phrases such as neosynanthropic
plant of Heywood (1989:32).
In the report that follows, consideration is initially given to the ecology of invasions of
exotic species (Section 2.1). Given that some countries and places are more prone to
invasion than others, the subject area (Australias Wet Tropics) is examined (Sections
2.2, 2.3) with regard to establishing principles of invasion proneness. Furthermore, prior
considerations of invasive species within the region were examined (Section 2.4) as were
various landscape components deemed to be particularly at risk (Section 2.5).
In Section 3, the various weed Risk Assessment Systems (RASs) were reviewed and the
basic elements identified (Section 3.3) for the purpose of devising an appropriate system
for use in the Wet Tropics. The task of tailoring a RAS explicitly for this region is
explored in Section 4. This is set out in four parts ie, guidance from insights into weed
invasions in tropical settings (4.1), consideration of intrinsic (biological) traits (4.2) and
extrinsic factors (4.3), resulting in a derivative ranking methodology as detailed in 4.4.
Section 5 consists of an attempt to provide a current inventory of alien plant species
present in the region, with exotic species recorded as naturalised regionally within the
database of the Queensland Herbarium (HERBRECS) forming the basic data set
(Section 5.1). This list of exotic naturalised plant taxa has been emended to incorporate
recent nomenclatural changes and to deal with individual species rather than
infraspecific taxa such as subspecies, varieties and varietal cultivars and to take into
account exotic species known locally to have naturalised or in the process of doing so
but which have not been included to date in the collection. The newly formulated RAS
was trialed using a >10% sample including weeds widely held to be the most significant
regionally and the outcomes of the assessment compared with what is known regarding
some of the most invasive species both globally (Sections 5.3, 5.4) and nationally (5.5).
Species regarded to be sleepers or those in the early phases of a potentially explosive
invasion are specified in Section 5.6.
Broad management considerations are examined in Section 6. Management responses
considered required comprise introduction prevention (6.1), early control intervention
(6.2), the importance of efforts being ecologically integrated (6.3), strategic
control/containment (6.4) and the need for further research (6.5). The conclusions and
recommendations arising from this investigation are outlined in the final section (7.0)
and additional information is set out in the form of four appendices ie, project specifics
(Appendix 1), list of naturalised exotic plants (Appendix 2), an interactive species
database (Appendix 3), together with a visual presentation of basic elements and
outcomes of the project (Appendix 4).
Page 2
2.0
Background
The current study was recently commissioned by the agency responsible for
overarching management of the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area ie, the Wet
Tropics Management Authority (WTMA). Day-to-day management of the Area is the
responsibility of State partner agencies that include the Environment Protection
Authoritys (EPA) Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service (QPWS), Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) and others. What follows is designed to inform WTMA
decisions regarding allocation of priorities and resources to weed control within the
wider gamut of area management and management activities of partner agencies.
2.1
Invasion Ecology
Invasion issues came to the forefront of a developing natural science with the
publication in 1958 of Eltons seminal book called The Ecology of Invasions by
Animals and Plants. This prompted not only an interest in plants and animals that
have impacts on agriculture but also a greater scientific emphasis on the rapid changes
that increased biotic exchange was imposing on indigenous systems and the adverse
implications for the survival of native species.
Investigation of exotic species invasions was complemented by the work of Grime
(1977) who identified three primary reproductive strategies in plants and discussed the
theoretical ramifications for ecology and evolution. He linked external factors such as
stress and disturbance and considered the four permutations of (i) high stress-high
disturbance, (ii) high stress-low disturbance, (iii) low stress-low disturbance and (iv)
low stress-high disturbance and determined that only three provided viable plant
habitats since the first scenario is inhospitable to plant growth. Accordingly, scenario
(ii) is associated with stress-tolerant plants, (iii) with competitive plants, and (iv)
with ruderal or annual plants that are physiologically/reproductively adjusted for rapid
life cycles attuned to regular or periodic disturbances. It is the latter category that
provides most of the known agricultural weeds ie, plants that can cope with, or are
advantaged by, disturbances associated with cultivation and/or grazing. Environmental
weeds, however, belong predominantly but not exclusively to groups of plants
associated with scenario (iii). These are species with superior competitive abilities
including rapid and highly plastic stress responses (Grime 1977:1184) or such as may
arise from the lack of natural enemies in the novel environment (Markin 1989:70) that
tend to maximise vegetative growth.
Competitive superiority can arise from various biological/autecological attributes. For
instance, rapid acclimation to sudden light increases brought about by canopy gap
formation is demonstrated to advantage exotic tree species establishment in subtropical
island forests of Japan (Yamashita et al. 2000). Incidentally, the tree species in
question, Java Cedar (Bischofia javanica) is a native rainforest tree of the Australian
Wet Tropics. It exhibits a capacity for superior performance in photosynthetic rates of
existing shade leaves and rapid deployment of new sun leaves when transferred from
shade to sun commensurate with an ability to outperform natives in habitats prone to
typhoon (cyclone) disturbance.
Heywood (1989:44-45) argues that invasion of tropical forests is triggered by
widespread disruption or conversion of the primary forest to secondary successional
communities. The history of widespread logging of the rainforests, combined with
cyclone disturbance, has brought about such a situation regionally and, accordingly, an
increase in invasion proneness.
Page 3
Genetic screening may offer possibilities for weed detection since it appears that some
non-indigenous plant species grow taller and exhibit a higher reproductive capacity in
a host environment compared with their performance in the native environments.
Willis et al. (2000) investigate the possibility that this is more of a genetic change
rather than the traditional proposition of a plastic response to a benign new
environment. By comparing several weeds in Australia and New Zealand with their
counterparts in Britain and continental Europe these workers failed to find evidence
that increased plant size, where it occurs, is a genetically determined characteristic of
of invasive plants, or that the phenomenon is widespread among invasive species
(Willis et al. 2000:282). It is, thus, more likely to be a plastic response to a novel
environment.
Chemical defences are also associated with the frequently observed superior
performance of alien plant species. These defences may be in the form chemical
agents such as those that occur in the Neem Tree (Azadirachta indica) that reduce
herbivory, therefore maximising photsynthetic sequestration and growth. Callaway &
Aschehoug (2000) and Ridenour & Callaway (2001), in studies of root exudates of a
noxious weed in America, have demonstrated a much greater negative effects on
American native grasses than on their counterparts in communities from which the
weed originates. In commenting on this work, Jensen (2000:421) claims that the
invader apparently gains an edge in its adopted home not only by ditching its
herbivores but by wielding [chemical] weaponry that hampers its new neighbors
(sic) growth. This has significant repurcussions regarding competition for resources
and, of course, implications for invasiveness potential.
Davis et al. (2000) attempt to replace andectodal study of the invasion process by
considering the availability of resources to a potential invader. These workers suggest
that invasion is influenced by three major factors: ie, (i) propagule pressure (the
numbers of seeds/fragments, repeated introductions, etc.), (ii) characteristics of the
introduced species, and (iii) the invasibility of the new (host) environment. While the
second factor pertains to intrinsic or biological traits of the prospective invader, the
third is an emergent property that derives from climate, disturbance regimes and the
competitive abilities of resident plants. They further argue that a more integrative
approach to invasibility and the invasion process might be proposed with respect to
fluctuating resource availability. The proposition is that a plant community becomes
more susceptible to invasion whenever there is an increase in the amount of unused
resources (Davis et al.2000:529) and that a communitys suceptibility to invasion is
not static.
Disturbance whether regular or episodic is a natural feature of dynamic ecosystems
(Sousa 1984) but also facilitates the invasion process by eliminating/reducing the cover
and/or vigour of native competitors and/or by increasing resource levels. This is
especially so when it coincides with ready availability of the invading species
propagules. Consequently, the following predictions can be made:
environments subject to to pronounced fluctuations in resource supply (eg, either

by periodic fluxes of resources (eg, nutrients, water, etc.) are more susceptible to
invasion than comparable systems with more stable resource supply;
environments are more susceptible to invasion immediately following abrupt
disturbances that cause increases/decreases in resource availability (eg, following
cyclone damage, fires, etc.);
Page 4
invasability will increase when the interval is long between increase in resource
supply and eventual capture/recapture of sites by native vegetation;
nutrient-rich communities, in particular, that are subjected to increased grazing
pressures are suceptible to invasion;
there is no necessary relationship between the species diversity of a plant
community and its resilience to invasion; and,
there will be no general relationship between the primary productivity of a
community and its susceptibility to invasion (Davis et al. 2000:532).
These predictions appear to be well substantiated, assist in understanding the great

variability of the invasion process in both temporally and spatially, and have a direct
bearing on the other side of the alien invasion issue ie, consideration of ecosystems at
risk.
Lvei (1997:627) notes that invading plant (and animal) species have caused drastic
changes in the receiving biota, especially in island floras, but continental areas are
also greatly impacted. Alien invaders firstly decrease the distinctiveness of local
floras/faunas and, secondly, break down the geographic isolation of separate biotic
regions that maintains global biodiversity. In some places such as New Zealand,
introductions of new plants and animals has dramatically increased species diversity;
but as it has become more diverse it has lost and decreased the survivability of many
endemic species and has generally become more similar to the rest of the world. The
extent of impacts, Lvei argues, renders introduced species invasion as a serious threat
to global biodiversity to that of human-induced climatic change (ie, ozone depletion
and carbon dioxide enrichment), and possibly second only to vegetation clearing.
A multitude of impacts can derive from environmental weeds. Williams & West
(2000:429) succinctly tabulate these impacts (Table 1) but also comment that few
quantitative measures of impact have been documented.
Table 1: Potential impacts of environmental weeds on indigenous ecosystems (after Williams
& West 2000:Table 5).
competition with native plants for light, nutrients, moisture, pollinators, & they smother/crowd the soil
replacement of native plant communities
prevention/inhibition of natural regeneration
change in the movement of water in both soil & watercourses (see Bunn et al. 1998)
increase of soil eroision by shading out ground plants which would normally hold surface soil together
change in the shape of the land (eg, different grass types on coastal dune systems may introduce
poisons into the soil that prevent other stabilising plants from growing & may be toxic to animals)
provision of food/shelter for pest animals (including indigenous pest animals such as cane rats)
change in water quality/characteristics (eg, willow (Salix) spp. & aquatic habitat)
introduction of foreign genes into local populations by hybridisation (cross breeding & gene
swamping)
changes in fire behaviour by altering quantity & flammability of fuel loads
alteration of disturbance regimes
Page 5
In a review of exotic plant species in Hawaii, Smith (1989:61-62) also details five
major impacts in comparable tropical landscapes other than simple physical
displacement of native species. These are (i) formation of monotypic stands that
results in biodiversity loss and can have devastating effects on the survival of endemic
species with limited ranges and small population sizes; (ii) changing fire characteristics
(especially due to fire-promoting exotic pasture grasses); (iii) changing soil-water
regimes (often due to lack of phenological synchronicity with host environments
climate); (iv) changing nutrient status (associated with introduced N-fixing pasture
legumes); and (v) promotion of mutually beneficial interaction between alien plants
and feral animals. Also, it should be recognised that impacts can amplify as the
cumulative effects of multiple, low probability events (Levins 1989:426).
King (1987) reviewed the multiple-staged process of extinction and identified 13
milestones the final being excessive competition from introduced species that are
eventually responsible for pushing organisms irretrievably over the edge. Incidentally,
an earlier milestone was hybridisation and genetic swamping that may be due to
exotics as well as translocated natives. Within Australia, invasive exotic species have
been primarily implicated in the presumed extinction of at least four plant species and
have the potential to force many more native plants to extinction (Groves & Willis
1999:164). The highly restricted nature of many endemic plant species distributions
within the Wet Tropics Bioregion (Werren et al. 1995; Goosem et al. 1999) renders
this regional flora particularly vulnerable to extinction due to threatening processes
such as pest invasion.
It must be noted, however, that the impacts on native biodiversity associated with alien
invaders are not exclusively negative. Groves & Willis (1999:169) point out that
impacts can, in fact, be positive, negative or neutral, depending on the biotic group
measured. A tropical example ie, that of the invasion of Mimosa pigra into
wetlands of the Northern Territory was employed. This showed that some plant
groups, birds and lizards sustained negative biodiversity impacts, but positive benefits
were felt by the rare marsupial mouse Sminthopsis virginiae and no changes in frog
numbers were detected. It is evident that some invasive exotic species in the wet
tropics also produce some benefits to at least nectarivorous native insects, given
numbers of butterflies observed foraging on Lantana camara and Asclepias
currasavica. There are, however, strong indications that specialist host-specific insects
are impacted greatly with the replacement of native vegetation with exotics supporting
greatly reduced arthropod numbers with significant repercussions for predatory mites,
spiders, wasps and other parasitic insects and insectivorous frogs, reptiles, birds and
mammals (McFadyen 2000).
2.2
Subject Area
The Wet Tropics Bioregion is situated along the tropical east coast of northern
Queensland. Its western boundary is shared with the Einasleigh Uplands Bioregion,
which lies in the rainshadow of high and wet coastal ranges that dominate the Wet
Tropics. In the north the region is bordered by the eastern part of Cape York
Peninsula, and in the south grades into the northern coastal extremity of the Brigalow
Belt. With an area of 1 849 725 ha, the Wet Tropics Bioregion covers approximately
1% of Queensland (Goosem et al. 1999:7/5).
The region is distinguished among Australian bioregions by the extraordinary richness
of its flora and vegetation. It is recognised as one of the worlds centres of plant
diversity (Werren et al. 1995) and supports the most extensive tracts of closed forest
Page 6
(vine forest or rainforest) on the continent. It is the second most floristically rich1 of
Australias biogeographic provinces with in excess of 4 660 species recorded (WTMA
2000:25) of which 25% or over 1 150 species are endemic. The level of generic
endemicity in the Wet Tropics Bioregion is second only to New Caledonia in terms of
endemic genera conserved per unit area (Webb & Tracey 1981, Morat et al. 1986).
In addition, many terrestrial vertebrates are known from the Wet Tropics Bioregion
(Williams et al. 1996). Of these, 20 are introduced. Excluding these, the total of 566
species represents 28% of all Australian terrestrial vertebrates. At least 12% of these
are endemic (i.e., entirely restricted to the region), although this is highly variable
between taxonomic groups (4-39% - Williams et al.,1996). The region also supports a
rich freshwater fish fauna, with 40% of the Australian species complement
represented here, and the Russell-Mulgrave system, in particular, being extraordinarily
important to this group (Pusey, pers. comm.). In addition, the invertebrate fauna is
very diverse. This is indicated by the fact that 60% of the total Australian species
within a single invertebrate group - the butterflies - occurs within this region. Such
faunal diversity is similarly threatened by invasive alien species, including both plants
and animals.
2.2.1 Climate
Many of the distinctive features of the region relate to the high rainfall and terrain
diversity. The mean annual rainfall ranges from about 1 200 mm to over 8 000 mm.
However, Mt Bellenden Ker, at an altitude of 1 561 metres, has recorded as much as 10
472 mm over an eight month period (during January to August 1979) and has received
1 140 mm of rain in a 24 hour period (Tracey 1982). Rainfall intensities at this station
are amongst the highest recorded in the world. The rainfall is distinctly seasonal with
over 60% falling in the summer months of December to March. By comparison with
other tropical rainforested areas of the world, the wetter parts of the region lie at the
'extremely wet' end of the hydrological spectrum. The occurrence of widespread
overland flow also appears to be rare in wet tropical rainforests elsewhere.
Intense tropical cyclones are a natural disturbance feature of the region's climate, with
an average of one severe cyclone occurring every three years. This region has the
highest incidence of such tropical cyclones with over 40% of all systems so classified
impinging on the Wet Tropics. This is a major factor shaping the structural and
floristic differentiation of the vegetation - particularly with respect to the mosaics of
the coastal lowlands (Werren et al. 1995).
The coastal belt experiences a mean daily temperature from a January maximum of
31oC to a minimum of 23oC with a 5Co reduction in these figures during a very mild
winter. The uplands/tablelands are cooler with mean daily temperatures ranging from
28oC to 17oC with mean daily winter temperatures ranging from 22oC to 9oC.
2.2.2 Physiography, geology and soils
The uplands or tableland unit consists of undulating country at an altitude of around
900m, with rounded summits rising to more than 1 200m. The highest peak is Mt
Bartle Frere which reaches 1 622m. To the east of the tablelands the Eastern
Escarpment marks the limit of headwards erosion into the uplifted erosion surface from
the coastal lowlands. This is a unit typified by rugged topography, rapid geomorphic
1
The south-western province of Western Australia is the foremost species-rich region of Australia with an estimated
5 500 species (Beard 1995:484), although the generic and familial diversity of the Wet Tropics far exceeds that of this
region.
Page 7
processes and great environmental diversity. The coastal lowlands comprise an

alluvial plain of variable width interrupted by ridges of the Great Divide and several
large perennial rivers such as the Herbert, North and South Johnstone, Tully, RussellMulgrave, Barron, Daintree and Bloomfield, which drain from headwaters on the
tablelands/uplands.
The main lithotypes (slates and greywackes) beneath the region comprise marine
Silurian, Devonian and Carboniferous sediments of the Hodgkinson Basin and the
Broken River Embayment. The greatest concentration of volcanics and granitic parent
materials occur at the southern margin of the Hodgkinson Basin where it intersects the
trend of the Broken River Embayment. The volcanics of the tablelands and adjacent
basaltic/rhyolitic provinces which formed from around 12 million years ago are
characterised by scoria cones, lava cones and maars. The tablelands and some portions
of the coast were subject to basalt flows throughout the Pliocene-Pleistocene. The high
nutrient status of the basalt-derived soils makes them readily to invasion by more
nutrient-demanding alien plant species. Climatic change and geomorphic processes
during the Quaternary led to repeated coastal transgressions and retreat leading to the
attainment of present sea level approximately 4 500 years ago (Werren et al. 1995).
2.2.3 Landscape configuration and native vegetation cover
The bioregion is dominated by rugged rainforested mountains, including the highest in
Queensland. It also includes extensive plateaux areas along its western margin, as well
as low-lying coastal plains. The most extensive lowlands are in the south, associated
with the floodplains of the Tully and Herbert Rivers. Most of the bioregions streams
debouche into the Coral Sea section of the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon from small
coastal catchments, but higher western areas drain in the south into the Burdekin River,
and in the north into tributaries of the Mitchell River.
The major vegetation formation represented within the region is the closed canopy
mesic forest or 'rainforest'. The combination of a diversity of rainfall, soil type,
drainage and altitude, together with a complex evolutionary history, has resulted in a
wide variety of identifiable rainforest communities which is recognised as being
floristically and structurally the most diverse of any in Australia. The region's
rainforests have been classified into 13 major structural types (Tracey 1982) as
follows:
complex mesophyll vine forest (types 1a, 1b, 1c)
mesophyll vine forest (types 2a, 2b)
mesophyll vine forest with dominant palms (types 3a, 3b)
semi-deciduous mesophyll vine forest (type 4)
complex notophyll vine forest (types 5a, 5b)
complex notophyll vine forest with emergent Agathis robusta (type 6)
notophyll vine forest - rarely without Acacia spp. (types 7a, 7b)
simple notophyll vine forest - often with Agathis microstachya (type 8)
simple microphyll vine-fern forest - often with A. atropurpurea (type 9)
simple microphyll vine-fern thicket (type 10)
deciduous microphyll vine thicket (type 11)
closed forest with wattle (Acacia spp.) emergents/co-dominants (types 12a,

12b, 12c, 12d)
closed forest with sclerophyll (particularly Eucalyptus spp. and some

wattles) emergents and co-dominants (types 13a, 13b, 13c, 13d, 13e, 13f).
Page 8
Each forest type can be correlated with climatic type, soil parent material, altitude and
disturbance regimes. The floristic composition within each type varies from one
locality to another and reflects, amongst other things, past expansions and contractions
of rainforests due to climatic perturbations.
Rainforests attain their peak development as complex mesophyll vine forests on the
very wet and wet lowlands and foothills where parent materials range from basalts,
basic volcanics, mixed colluvia and riverine alluvia. These communities exhibit an
uneven canopy extending to between 20 to 40 metres and there is much stratification
and many emergents with large spreading crowns (eg, figs, Ficus spp.). Floristic
composition and variety of life forms are the most complex of any terrestrial vegetation
type on the continent. Exposed sites such as foothill ridges and seaward slope facets
often exhibit cyclone disturbed or broken canopies with 'climber towers' and dense
vine tangles. These are locally known as 'cyclone scrubs' (Webb 1958). These systems
appear vulnerable to exotic species infestations, especially along edges adjacent to
agricultural lands. Within complex mesophyll vine forest communities variation in site
factors induces conspicuous structural differentiation such as the increase in palms on
sites with impeded drainage and gingers and aroids in gullies and along creek banks
which are permanently saturated with water (Tracey 1982).
The notophyll vine forest category embraces a structurally and floristically diverse
group of communities (types 5, 6, 7, 8 of Tracey 1982). These occur on small areas of
basic volcanic parent materials on cool wet uplands and highlands (ie, type 5a) and on
a range of drier sites at various elevations (type 5b), the western and northern fringes
of the main rainforest massif from Cardwell extending to Julatten, the Hann Tableland
and to the north of Bloomfield (type 6), on sandy beach ridges in drier coastal zones
and exposed sites backed by foothills north of Cairns (type 7), and as one of the most
extensive, an even-canopy mountain forest assemblage (type 8) on granitic ranges
rising from 400 to 1 000 metres altitude between Ingham and Cooktown. These
communities, while extraordinarily variable, are characterised by a canopy range of 1245 metres in height, the occurrence of rattans or palm lianes, strangler figs, frequently
conspicuous epiphytes and variable amounts of ferns, walking stick palms (Linospadix
spp.) and fleshy herbs.
Towards the upper end of the altitudinal spectrum on the summits and upper slopes of
the higher peaks which are frequently enshrouded by cloud (hence horizontal
interception or 'fog-drip' is characteristic) and often exposed to strong winds, simple
microphyll fern forests or thickets dominate. These often possess a strong aerially
suspended moss component and are sometimes referred to as 'cloud' or 'elfin' forests, or
more precisely 'wet montane forests'.
Many sites experience significant water stress during the dry season and support closed
forest/thicket communities characterised by the occurrence of taxa which are semideciduous to deciduous. Semi-deciduous mesophyll vine forest (type 4) is restricted to
minor occurrences to the north-west of Cairns, and to foothills between the Bloomfield
River and Cooktown (Tracey 1982). Sporadic occurrences of deciduous microphyll
vine thicket (type 11) occur on fire-free rocky sites and exposed headlands.
Constituents are mainly multi-stemmed and fully deciduous. Vine forest with
sclerophyll emergents (types 12, 13) are also encountered. These represent different
stages of post-disturbance (eg, fire, logging and/or cyclones) succession and vary
considerably in floristic composition, with each sub-type characterised by the
dominance/co-dominance of certain sclerophylls (ie, eucalypts and wattles).
Page 9
Non-rainforest communities typify approximately one-third of the property listed as

the WHA. These include: tall open forest (wet sclerophyll communities - types 14a,
14b - typified by the occurrence of Eucalyptus grandis, E. resinifera respectively, and
a mesic understorey); medium open sclerophyll forest and woodland (types 14c, 14d,
15, 16, 17, 18, 19) dominated by a variety of eucalypts and the bloodwood genus
Corymbia, together with Lophostemon suaveolens, Melaleuca quinquenervia; heathy
shrublands characterised by Allocasuarina, Banksia and Acacia etc. about mountain
rock pavements (type 21); and various species of wattle and other paperbarks
(Melaleuca spp.) swamp communities. Stunted paperbark (M. viridiflora) low
forest/woodland (type 20) occurs on acid soils with impeded drainage adjacent to
mangroves (type 22a) which, with around 31 species (Le Cussan, pers. comm.), are
amongst the richest, and certainly those exhibiting the greatest vertical development, in
the world. Patches of samphire flat almost exclusively dominated by salt-tolerant
chenopods (type 22b) are also a feature of the coastal mosaics.
2.3
Consideration of Peculiarities of the Host Environment
The Wet Tropics of Queensland is distinguished by virtue of the fact that in 1988, as an
initiative of the Commonwealth Government, some 9 000 km2 of this bioregion have
been inscribed on the World Heritage List (Werren & King 1991). This means that
Australia has entered into an international agreement to protect, conserve and present
the area's World Heritage values for present and future generations. This constitutes an
international obligation to protect those outstanding universal natural (and cultural)
values for which the Area was listed. These values relate to the four criteria for listing
an area ie:
outstanding examples representing major stages of the earths evolutionary

history (eg, Age of Pteridophytes/Conifers and Cycads/Angiosperms, etc.);
outstanding examples representing significant ongoing ecological and
biological processes (ie, processes generating high endemism, speciation);
contain superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty
and aesthetic importance; and
most important and significant habitats for in situ conservation of biological
diversity, including those containing threatened species (WTMA 1999:23-25).
It is easily demonstrated that these values are concentrated in the native vegetation
communities and that their protection, conservation and presentation is reliant upon the
ongoing integrity of these systems. Clearly, weed invasion represents a threat to this
and is identified as a pressure affecting condition that warrants a management
response (in Condition, Pressure, Reponse models) and as a threatening process to
the survival of threatened species and REs (WTMA 1999:22). Those REs at risk are
listed in Table 2.
The tropicality of the region ie, its warm to hot, humid climate is a situation that
can be exploited by alien plant species, particularly species adapted to similarly warm,
moist climatic conditions. Conditions so conducive to rapid plant growth can greatly
accelerate the invasion process. Rejmnek (1989:383) clearly demonstrates that plant
communities in mesic environments are more invasible compared with those in more
extreme environments.
Page 10
Table 2: Wet Tropics Regional Ecosystems at risk (after Goosem et al.1999:Table 7.4)
Summary of conservation status
Endangered
24
Of concern
17
No concern at present 64
TOTAL
105
Endangered Regional Ecosystems
7.2.1
7.2.2
7.3.1
7.3.2
7.3.3
7.3.4
7.3.6
7.3.7
7.3.10
7.3.12
7.3.13
7.3.22
7.3.24
7.3.25
7.3.26
7.3.28
7.8.2
7.8.3
7.8.6
7.8.7
7.8.8
7.11.2
7.11.8
7.12.12
Mesophyll rainforest on coastal beach sands;

provinces 3, 9
Notophyll rainforest with Acacia emergents on coastal beach sands;
province 8
Sedgeland grassland freshwater swamp on coastal lowlands;
provinces 1, 2, 3, 9
Sedgeland grassland freshwater peat swamps of volcanic craters;
province 4
Alexandra palm (Archontophoenix alexandrae) on poorly drained lowlands;
Fan palm (Licuala ramsayi) swamp rainforest on poorly drained lowlands;
provinces 2, 3, 9
Melaleuca open forest/rainforest complex on poorly drained lowlands;
Eucalyptus/Melaleuca open forest complex on poorly drained lowlands;
provinces 1, 2, 3
Complex mesophyll rainforest on well drained fertile lowland alluvials;
provinces 2, 3, 9
Blue gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis) woodland on well drained lowland alluvials; provinces 2, 3, 9
Corymbia nesophila woodland on well drained lowland gravelly alluvial soils;
province 9
Complex mesophyll riparian rainforest on well drained lowland alluvial levees;
provinces 2, 6, 9
Melaleuca dealbata riparian open forest on lowland alluvia;
provinces 1, 2
Melaleuca, eucalypt and notophyll rainforest spp. riparian forest,
province 1
River Oak (Casuarina cunninghamiana) riparian forest,
province 1
Herbfield and shrubland of river sandbars and river beds,
Complex mesophyll rainforest on basalt uplands;
province 4
Complex notophyll rainforest on basalt lowlands, foothills and uplands;
provinces 4, 9
Semi-deciduous mesophyll rainforest on basalt foothills;
provinces 3, 9
Blue gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis) tall open forest on basalt uplands and highlands; province 4
Eucalyptus phaeotricha woodland on basalt uplands and highlands;
province 4
Fan palm (Licuala ramsayi) forest on poorly drained metamorphic tablelands;
province 8
Notophyll rainforest with Acacia on metamorphic lowlands and foothills;
provinces 2, 3, 8
Notophyll rainforest with Acacia emergents on granite lowlands and foothills;
provinces 5, 8
Regional Ecosystems of concern

7.1.3
7.2.4
7.3.5
7.3.23
7.3.27
7.8.1
7.8.4
7.8.9
7.11.16
7.11.20
7.12.2
7.12.10
7.12.18
7.12.21
7.12.22
7.12.23
7.12.24
Bulkuru (Elaeocaharis dulcis) swamp on poorly drained acid peats;

provinces 1, 2, 3
Open forests and woodlands on old dune ridges;
provinces 1, 2, 3
Swamp paperbark (Melaleuca quinquenervia) on poorly drained lowlands;
Semi-deciduous notophyll riparian rainforest on well drained alluvial levees;
provinces 1, 5, 8
Eucalypt and swamp mahogany (Lophostemon suaveolens) riparian forest,
provinces 1, 2, 3
Complex mesophyll rainforest on basalt lowlands and foothills;
provinces 3, 4, 9
Complex notophyll rainforest on basalt uplands and highlands;
province 4
Molloy red box (Eucalyptus leptophleba) woodland on dry basalt uplands;
province 4
Tall open pink bloodwood woodland on moist metamorphic uplands;
provinces 5, 6
Corymbia nesophila forest on metamorphic lowlands and foothills;
province 9
Fan palm (Licuala ramsayi) mesophyll rainforest on poorly drained granite foothills; provinces 3, 9
Notophyll rainforest with hoop pine (Araucaria cunninghamii) on granite uplands; province 5
Microphyll rainforest with hoop pine (Araucaria cunninghamii) on granite uplands; province 5
Flooded gum (Eucalyptus grandis) forest on granite and rhyolite uplands;
Red mahogany (Eucalyptus resinifera) forest on granite and rhyolite uplands;
Pink bloodwood (Corymbia intermedia) woodland on granite and rhyolite uplands; provinces 5, 6
White mahogany (Eucalyptus acmenoides) woodland on granite foothills;
provinces 2, 3, 6.
The region also is characterised by high local relief exceeding 1 600m and its
ecological diversity, promotes mostly year-round plant growth in a range of
environments. This range of conditions, from tropical analogues of cool temperate
forests and high montane summit areas, through hot-dry tropical open woodlands to
very wet tropical lowland communities, is present, allowing a commensurate range of
environments for the establishment of an array of alien plants.
Page 11
The subject area is highly biodiverse (Werren et al. 1995, WTMA 2000). High
biodiversity means that a large number of resident organisms are present that might
present a hindrance to weed establishment, or, on the other hand, that can pollinate
and/or disperse an alien species (Orians 1986:135) potentially facilitating its invasion.
It is generally contended that intact forested areas particularly those that are highly
biodiverse are particularly resistant to weed invasion (eg, Humphries & Stanton
1992). However, this contention is not supported by the work of Higgins et al.
(1998:303) in Cape Peninsula, South Africa, which indicates that species richness and
invasibility are positively correlated and that species richness is a poor indicator of
invasive resistance in the study site. Further, they argue soundly for spatially
explicit approach to quantifying threats to biodiversity as the basic information
required to prioritise threats from alien species and the sites that need urgent
management attention. Similarly, Lavorel et al. 1999:41) demonstrated that there was
no strong relationship between invasibility and functional or species richness.
Such conflicting understandings arising from both anecdotal information and intensive
scientific study of particular groups of weeds at particular locations are as problematic
as the paradox of weed invasion itself. Sax & Brown (2000:363) note that it is
paradoxical that exotic species invade and displace native species that are well
adapted to local environments and go on to offer an explanation of the invasibility of
continental regions that is a function of pre-adaptation to human-modified
environments and escape from co-evolved enemies. In contrast the greater
invasibility of islands is considered to reflect the peculiar evolutionary dynamics of
insular species.
The greater susceptibility of island habitats to alien invasions is well documented
(Heywood 1989, Rejmnek 1989, Lvei 1997, Sax & Brown 2000, Thomas in press).
Various workers, have commented on the natural insularity of many Australian
rainforest patches, coining phrases such as islands in a sea of sclerophyll vegetation
(Webb & Tracey 1981), or islands of green in a land of fire (Bowman 2000). It is
reasonable to assume, therefore, that increased susceptibility to invasion is associated
with such a spatial configuration.
Moreover, the extent of fragmentation of a variety of vegetation types within the
region, including non-rainforest communities, is great. This includes the
disproportionate loss of wetlands (Russell et al. 1996) and priority coastal
communities of the FNQ 2010 Plan. It is notable that Groves & Willis (1999:164)
argue that increasing fragmentation of natural vegetation is a major factor that allows
weeds to establish and dominate and thereby threaten still further the continued
existence of native plant species and the Australian ecosystems in which they occur.
Given the above, we are clearly contending with a situation equivalent to the title of a
paper by Timmins & Owens (in press) ie, scary weeds and superlative places.
Those superlative natural values that justified inscription of much of the region on the
World Heritage List are potentially at risk from a suite of highly invasive alien weeds
that exceeds 500 species. The task, therefore, of determining the aggressive invaders
amongst the host of alien plant species introductions is a vital but daunting one. Based
on studies of what traits might confer invasive potential among closely related species,
Radford & Cousens (2000:531) even suggest that invasiveness is essentially
unpredictable. What is evident, however, is that both intrinsic biological and host
environmental factors are involved and that it is dependent on some habitat/plant
specific interactions between a prospective invader and location of the introduction.
Page 12
2.4
Previous Consideration of Weeds within the Wet Tropics Bioregion
Just after its inception, WTMA commissioned a comprehensive review of the regions
weeds that was undertaken by Humphries & Stanton (1992). These workers
considered that large tracts of rainforest did not appear to be particularly vulnerable to
significant weed incursions even after natural disturbance but that riparian systems,
freshwater wetlands and paperbark swamps were being extensively invaded by a suite
of major environmental weeds. Eight of these weeds were identified as being of
priority concern due to their capacity to spread into intact communities without being
assisted by human disturbance. These are Annona glabra, Clitoria laurifolia, Coffea
arabica, Harungana madagascariensis, Lantana camara, Sanchezia parvibracteata,
Thunbergia grandiflora and Turbina corymbosa. A subset (5) of these was considered
particularly problematic and consultancies were offered to Swarbrick (1993a, 1993b,
1993c) and Swarbrick & Skarratt (1994) to investigate extent of infestations, potential
areas of infestation and options for control. The concerning subset comprised
A. glabra, H. madagascariensis, T. corymbosa, S. parvibrateata and C. arabica.
Mechanical and chemical control trials were also undertaken to produce
recommendations for treatment.
Subsequently, intensive control efforts targetting Harungana were implemented
resulting in control of around 60% of the infestations (Walton pers. comm.).
Unfortunately, resources were not allocated to extend treatments and to provide
follow-up so infestations have rebounded and the weed continues to invade forests
along the eastern fall of the Bellenden Ker massif and along the Graham Range.
Pond Apple a species that has been elevated to a Weed of National Significance
(WONS) - has been subjected to strategic control within only one sensitive protected
area to date. This is Eubenangee Swamp National Park where a combination of
mechanical, chemical and fire management treatments have been applied by QPWS
staff. The invasive vines, Thunbergia grandiflora and Turbina corymbosa have also
been subjected to strategic control; the former by QPWS staff in Mulgrave River
National Park in concert with Pest Management crews of Cairns City Council (CCC),
and the latter within Kamerunga Conservation Park by CCC personnel.
The discovery in 1994 of Siam Weed (Chromolaena odorata) in the Mission Beach
area and later as significant infestations along the Tully River led to a major
Commonwealth initiative aimed at its eradication. A nationally funded joint effort led
by DNR entitled a Strategic Weed Eradication and Education Program (SWEEP) was
instigated, with major infestations treated and monitored. A follow-up treatment and
monitoring program remains current in Cardwell Shire and nearby parts of Johnstone
Shire where outbreaks were documented.
Currently, weed control is practiced throughout much of the region by the cane
industry (Cane Pests & Productivity Board) along with individual landholders. These
efforts primarily target agricultural weeds (cf. BSES 1989) although some can also be
invasive of other land uses including conservation. More integrated efforts are
expended by local government pest management and environmental repair (ie, Wet
Tropics Tree Planting Scheme) crews. DNR Land Protection officers assist this
activity through provision of advice on priorities, control treatment and by extension
work generally. Research on both weed autecology and chemical control are underway
at DNRs South Johnstone research centre. There is some involvement of the
Rainforest CRC in these ventures, along with this current initiative.
Page 13
2.5
Consideration of Landscape Components at Risk
As argued by Humphries & Stanton (1992:viii), riparian systems and wetlands have a
very high functional significance yet are particularly vulnerable landscape features to
weed invasion. Pysek & Prach (1993) document the high susceptibility of riparian
vegetation elsewhere in the world to invasion by exotic plants. Baker (1986:48) also
confirms this and other workers such as Dcamps et al. (1988, 1995) also discuss this
issue in detail. They also report on the enhancement of exotic species invasion of such
systems when human-induced disturbances significantly modify the hydrologic regime.
In the Mackay district of the Central Queensland Coast that is often referred to as a
southerly outlier of the Wet Tropics proper, Batianoff & Franks (1998:123) specified
riparian forest as the most susceptible vegetation type to environmental weed
invasion and that disturbed habitats support 95% of the environmental weeds.
Both riparian systems and wetlands have been disproportionately lost and degraded
within the Wet Tropics. The condition of the regions wetlands varies greatly and a
great proportion - estimated from 1992 aerial photography to be 46% of their recorded
extent in 1952 in the centrally located Russell-Mulgrave Catchment alone (Russell et
al. 1996:13) - have been drained and lost. Lagoons have been filled and turned into
canefields with their feeder streams and flowpaths transformed into cane drains, with
many conduits for the march of Pond Apple and many other weeds across the
landscape. Ewel (1986:222) notes that drainage of, and dike construction within, the
northern reaches of the Everglades marshes rendered them more invasible.
As a result, the regional ecosystems (REs) associated with these features have become
correspondingly rare and/or threatened (see Table 2 above). They too can be
considered to be at further risk from threatening processes, among which are those
posed by exotic plant and animal invasion. These considerations are incorporated in
components of the proposed RAS in Section 4.3, below.
In addition, there are some 363 species of plants within those communities that are at
rare and/or threatened (Goosem et al. 1999:7/60). Weed invasion may constitute a
threatening process in some situations where Pond Apple is replacing paperbark
wetlands that support the vulnerable Ant Plant (Myrmecodia beccari) which, in turn,
hosts the ant larval symbionts of the endangered Apollo Jewel Butterfly (Hypochrysops
apollo apollo).
It is not known exactly which species of animals are specifically at risk from weed
invasion. In fact, in certain circumstances, the proliferation of rank exotic grasses has
advantaged some species such as the vulnerable Crimson Finch (Neochmia phaeton
phaeton). McFadyen (2000) argues strongly that the ongoing habitat degradation
associated with weed invasion, however, does pose considerable risks to survival of a
host of animal species. She demonstrates that alien plants displace native flora on
which an entire complex native food web is dependent. They can, as in the case of
exotic species of Aristolochia, contain toxins that kill host-specific native species such
as the Cairns Birdwing Butterfly (Ornithoptera priamus euphorion) that deposit eggs
on native species (eg, A. tagala), or may be unpalatable to generalist herbivores, thus
decreasing food resources. Similarly, nectarivores can be greatly impacted with the
displacement of nectar-producing native plants resulting in the disruption or
displacement of guilds of organisms. The point is made that there are great flow-on
effects, many of which are entirely unpredictable.
Page 14
3.0
Weed Risk Assessment Systems
Various authorities throughout the world employ a variety of pest risk assessment
systems' (RAS) for two basic purposes. The first is to minimise the risk of introduction
of invasive alien organisms and is the province of international trade (eg, International
Standards for Phytosanitary Measures FAO 1996, 1998a, 1998b), quarantine and
national border control. The second, which is more relevant to the present task, is
related to prioritising established pest species for control, including the detection of
naturalised exotic species in their early stages of invasion that may constitute future
major weed problems. The two approaches share many elements, therefore both types
of approach may have relevance to the formulation of a risk assessment system (RAS)
for the Wet Tropics Bioregion and consideration of each is warranted.
3.1
RAS for Preventative Quarantine Purposes
Pest risk assessment was originally designed primarily to avoid importing pest
organisms and, with the great increase in global trade, is increasingly a focus of
quarantine and trade control authority activity. The Australian Quarantine Inspection
Service (AQIS) has a major responsibility to ensure that further introduction of pest
species to this country is kept to an absolute minimum. This organisation employs a
RAS to screen proposed plant imports and to provide an early warning system of
potential pest species and source areas. Individual states also influence the process of
screening proposed plant and animal introductions.
Risk assessment is fundamental to any initiative aimed at reducing the chance of weed
introductions. Waterhouse & Mitchell (1998), in setting out target species for
monitoring and survey associated with the Northern Australian Quarantine Strategy,
rely upon recorded weediness in the literature. Factors such as that associated with a
plants weediness elsewhere are usually the first filter in such introduction-screening
protocols.
Species purportedly not yet present in Australia but which are recorded in
neighbouring countries are ranked according to (i) potential to have serious economic
impacts, (ii) potential to have significant environmental impacts, (iii) likelihood of
accidental dispersal from adjacent land masses, (iv) a history of rapid recent spread in
Indonesia or Papua New Guinea, and (v) likelihood of successful establishment in
northern Australia (Waterhouse & Mitchell 1998:10). The resultant list of 41 species
includes two (ie, Chromalaena odorata and Mikania micrantha) that pose very serious
threats and which have been recorded within the Wet Tropics region. Both have been
subjected to intensive control measures.
3.1.1
International protocols (FAO 1996, 1998a, 1999)
Organisations such as the IUCN and FAO now clearly recognise the major threat posed
by alien species invasions to the worlds biodiversity. The Invasive Species Specialist
Group of the former claims that impacts of alien species are immense, insidious, and
usually irreversible [and] may be as damaging to native species and ecosystems on
a global scale as the loss and degradation of habitats (SSC 2000:1). Accordingly, the
Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) of the United Nations has set in place
various protocols to address such threats.
Guidelines for Pest Risk Analysis (PRA) were published by the FAO in 1996. These
cover (i) PRA process initiation, (ii) the risk analysis process itself, and (iii) managing
pest risk (FAO 1996:6). The second of these stages of the process (PRA) is of direct
Page 15
relevance to the present task. After identification of a pest, this second stage examines
individual pests to evaluate whether the criteria for quarantine pest status are
satisfied. These cover pests of potential economic importance (FAO 1996:11),
considering geographical distribution, biology and economic importance, and is reliant
on expert judgement in the assessment of establishment, spread and economic
importance potential. If this assessment suggests that a pest has significant economic
importance and introduction potential then quarantine protocols for risk management
are set in train. These cover a range of options (eg, inclusion on lists of prohibited
pests, inspection and certification prior to export, inspection at entry, etc. FAO
1996:16). They also provide for a process of monitoring and evaluating the various
options in relation to this pest. Subsequent guidelines cover protocols for the
determination of pest status in an area (FAO 1998a) and guidelines for pest eradication
(FAO 1998b). These guidelines are currently established under the name of
International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (FAO 1999) and fall under the
auspices of the International Plant Protection Convention. It is notable that the
economic component of PRA includes effects on ongoing integrated pest
management (IPM) programmes, environmental damage, capacity to act as a vector
for other pests, inter alia (FAO 1999:11, emphasis added).
3.1.2
Prevention/minimisation of risk of introductions to various

countries
Other countries have instituted a variety of RASs to prevent or minimise pest

introductions and for purposes of prioritising pests for management. While such
systems have been developed for often very different situations, these can inform the
task at hand. Reichard (in press:56) points out that in assessing patterns to improve the
predictabilty of invasive potential that differences found between North America,
which is mostly temperate, and Hawaii, which is tropical, except for some high
altitudes. Consequently she concludes, different traits may affect invasive ability
between tropical and temperate areas and that where weed risk assessment is
concerned, perhaps one size does not fit all. Despite the qualification, she suggests
that the following considerations are important in diagnosing invasive potential:
(i)
various plant traits should be fairly easy and quick to determine (ie, selfcompatability and number of seeds per plant may be not easy to establish and
can be avoided);
(ii)
traits should be clearly measurable (cf. breadth of ecological niche or

phenotypic plasticity can be difficult to etermine);
(iii)
use as few traits as possible while retaining accuracy;
(iv)
the positive traits (eg, utility as stock forage, ornamental amenity) should be
considered quite separately from invasive potential;
(v)
assume that an introduction to a country will be distributed throughout the

country (viz. an introduction may be considered relatively benign at point of
introduction or where it is intended to cultivate the plant, but it can, and likely
will spread or be spread, beyond); and
(vi)
whatever methods/traits are chosen, they should be flexible enough to

incorporate new information.
Weed protocols remain state-based in the U.S.A. and generally focus upon dealing
with existing pest problems (eg, Hiebert & Stubbendieck 1993).
Page 16
Thomas (in press) comments upon weed RAS development in Hawaii, which, in many
aspects hosts similar environments to those existing within the Wet Tropics Bioregion.
Invasive species entry prevention is a hot topic in Hawaii, with importation
essentially agriculture-based (Thomas in press:43, Mitchell pers. comm.). It is likely
that elements of the Hawaiian weed RAS (Teytaud 1998) such as are under
development under the auspices of a project dubbed HEAR Hawaiian Ecosystems at
Risk. Nominally it is an asset based (sensu Hall 1999:82) approach but it has will
have significant implications for quarantine protocols, especially assessment of
intrinsic attributes after Cronk & Fuller (1995) (see Section 3.2.4 below) and should be
compliant with IUCN Guidelines for the Prevention of Biodiversity Loss due to
Biological Invasion (Thomas in press:44).
Protocols associated with weed risk assessment operating in New Zealand are
informative, particularly with respect to aquatic weed risk assessment (Champion &
Clayton, in press). It is notable that those that were developed by New Zealands
Department of Conservation underpin weed risk assessment in other places such as
Galapagos Islands (Tye in press:25) and has been considered in RAS development in
Hawaii (Thomas in press).
3.1.3
Australian protocols (Pheloung 1995)
The Environmental Indicators for National State of the Environment Reporting:

Biodiversity states that exotic and alien organisms outside cultivation or captivity are a
major pressure on biological diversity (Pheloung 1995). While the number of such
organisms outside cultivation and captivity is reasonably well known for vertebrates,
higher plants and some invertebrates, knowledge is poor for most other organisms.
The role of the Commonwealth in invasive species management has traditionally been
barrier control through the Quarantine Act (1908), the assessment of environmental
impacts on native species through the Wildlife Protection (Regulation of Exports and
Imports) Act (1982) and is otherwise restricted to Commonwealth lands.
Pheloung (1995) has reviewed weed risk assessment systems for the prevention of
noxious species introductions to Australia. These systems have provided a numerical
scoring protocol as a basis for rejection, acceptance or further evaluation of proposed
exotic plant imports. He sets out guidelines for a three-tiered screening system to
assess weed potential of plant introductions. Plant species which pass the first tier (they
are not present on prohibited or allowed lists of species, and are potential quarantine
pests) are to be assessed before entry by a formal Weed Risk Assessment (WRA)
system, which is the second tier. In this system, answers are sought for questions on
historical, biogeographical and biological/ecological details of the candidate species.
A score generated by the procedure (Table 3) determines which of three
recommendations, reject, evaluate or accept, will result.
The WRA system was tested by analysis of its performance for 370 plant species,
representing weeds from agricultural, environmental and other sectors, and useful
plants. It was assessed on its ability to correctly reject weeds, accept non-weeds and
generate a low proportion of species requiring evaluation. Performance of the system
was compared to that of two simpler systems ie, species were also scored using the
AQIS (Hazard 1988) and Panetta (1993) systems. In the optimised WRA system, all
serious weeds, and most minor weeds, were rejected or required evaluation while only
7% of non-weeds were rejected. Less than 30% of the species required evaluation.
Although simpler systems were effective, the WRA system performed best. Simpler
systems produced too many evaluate recommendations or rejected many non-weeds.
Page 17
They were constrained by their lack of flexibility. The ability of the WRA system to
make reliable recommendations has a sound quantitative basis, and the mechanism is
transparent. These features are basic requirements for establishing phytosanitary
conditions in accordance with the General Agreement on Tarrifs and Trade (GATT)
SPS agreement.
Table 3: Scoring system employed by AQIS for decision-making on the importation of plants
(after Hazard 1988 in Pheloung 1995)
Criterion
Points
1:
Is the species a free-floating (surface or submerged) aquatic or can it survive,

grow and reproduce as a free-floating aquatic?
20
2: Does the species have a history of being a major weed elsewhere in similar
habiats (remember Australia is a big country of diverse habitats)
20
3: Does the species have a close relative of similar biology with a history of
weediness in simalr habitats?
10
4: Are the plants spiny?
10
5: Does the plant have spiny diaspores (ie, burrs)?
10
6: Are the plants harmful to animals (including humans)?
8
7: Do the plants produce stolons?
5
8: Do the plants have other forms of vegetative reproduction?
8
9: Are the diaspores wind dispersed?
8
10: Are the diaspores dispersed by animals and/or machinery?
8
11: Are the diaspores dispersed by water?
5
12: Are the diaspores dispersed by birds?
5
Scores totalling > 20, between 12 and 19, or <12 indicate grounds for rejection, further evaluation, or
acceptance, respectively.
3.1.4 State initiatives

Local and State Governments have a range of legislation and regulatory mechanisms
covering invasive species. The management of invasive species within Australia is
primarily the responsibility of individual landowners or land managers. Carter (2000)
provides a useful review of the legislation underpinning weed management in
Australia. It is notable that here has been a focus in the past on managing invasive
species that threaten economic production rather than environmental values. This
however is changing as States and Territories, through threat abatement processes, aim
to reduce invasive species pressure on threatened or endangered flora or fauna. There
has also been a shift towards classifying invasive species by their impact on
biodiversity rather than their economic effects.
Hall (1999) outlines the system of strategic weed management operating in Tasmania.
This system is asset-based where priorities are set according to the degree of threat
posed to natural (and cultural) assets (Hall 1999:82). It involves mapping of
infestations, considering and preparing a risk assessment of each weed outbreak,
accommodating both consideration of the significant of each outbreak and feasibility of
control. It is based on the Exotic Species Ranking System (ESRS) of Hiebert &
Stubbendieck (1993) developed in the U.S.A. (see Section 3.2.1 below).
The South Australian Pest Animal and Plant Board has a particularly explicit system
for weed assessment. This will be examined in detail in Section 3.2.7 below with view
to its applicability for the development of a Wet Tropics-explicit RAS.
In the State of Queensland the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is the lead
agency in pest management. Over the past four years, DNR has facilitated the
development of Local Government Pest Management Plans (PMPs) throughout the
Page 18
State, including in all ten2 local government areas within the bioregion. In the PMP
process, both weeds of agriculture and environmental weeds that occur within each
local government area are considered and ranked according to agricultural and/or
environmental risk and control potential. This allows the targetting of weeds of
highest priority that are considered to be controllable so that limited resources can be
strategically allocated in Councils works programs.
In order to rank those species of highest priority for research, staff of the Alan Fletcher
Weeds Research Institute have collated those listed in the regions local government
PMPs and have utilised a Multi-Objective Decision Support System (MODSS)
(Bebawi pers. comm.). This excercise resulted in the ranking of 31 species (including
one assumed native species, Rottboellia cochinchinensis) that emerged as the highest
priorities for control within the collective areas covered by the PMPs. These are set
out in Figure 1.
It is important to note that the outcome of DNR exercise is quite different from that
which is required from the current exercise. Inspection of Figure 1 will reveal that
application of the MODSS incorporated considerations other than invasive risk. While
this was accommodated within the first of two main discrimination components (ie,
impact and research), other factors such as economic and socio-cultural impacts
were also included, along with various factors associated with research activities,
against which the species were ranked. Of relevance here is the fact that the species
that emerged as priority weeds for research are likely candidates for problematic
environmental weed standing since they have been identified by a range of individuals
reflecting a variety of interests throughout the region. Accordingly, those inclusions
formed the basis of the sample screened utilising the proposed Wet Tropics RAS (see
Section 5.2.5 below)
3.2
RAS for Prioritising Existing Weed Incursions
Once a pest plant has arrived in a new host environment both long-term environmental
and economic benefits can accrue from its early detection and control and/or
eradication. This prompts a need for a systematic assessment of large numbers of
species whose impact may not be evident now but which may be in early stages of
invasion.
Virtue et al. (in press) point out that qualitative differences exist between decision
support systems for preventing introductions of unwanted species and those concerning
selection of species for control management. They claim that quarantine decisions
proceed on the basis of predicted negative impacts and potential area over which
that impact may be sustained, while control prioritisation will involve similar
considerations plus others that are associated with ease of treatment and potential for
control success. In addition, if the focus is on management for biodiversity
conservation, other factors such as the particular suceptibility of constituent native
species, assemblages and functionally significant landscape features such as
waterways and wetlands, needs to be accommodated.
The 10 local government areas comprise Atherton Shire, Cairns City, Cardwell Shire, Cook Shire, Douglas Shire,
Eacham Shire, Herberton Shire, Hinchinbrook Shire, Johnstone Shire and Mareeba Shire. Thuringowa City takes in
part of the southernmost protion of the bioregion but is largely marginal and not considered here.
Page 19
Figure 1: MODSS wet tropics weeds list prioritised by DNR researchers

(after draft document supplied by Bebawi pers. comm.)
Page 20
3.2.1
Exotic Species Ranking System of US Department of Interior

National Parks Service (Hiebert & Stubbendieck 1993)
A ranking system has been developed specifically for US conservation area managers
to classify exotic plants within protected areas according to the level of impact of a
species and its innate ability to become a pest (Hiebert & Stubbendieck 1993). The
Exotic Species Ranking System (ESRS) is designed to first separate innocuous species
from disruptive species. The separation allows researchers to then concentrate further
efforts on species in the disruptive category. It relies on consideration of significance
of impacts on protected area resources and on the ranking of biological attributes such
as life history characteristics (high seed output, long-distance dispersal adaptation,
ability to reproduce vegetatively) that are consistent with weediness (Box 1). Ranked
species lists are then classified according to perceived feasibility or ease of control.
The system is designed also to identify species that are not presently a serious threat
but have the potential to become a threat and which should be monitored closely. The
system also considers the potential costs associated with delaying control action.
Box 1. Criteria and scores of the ESRS (Hiebert & Stubbendieck 1993)
I.
A.
Significance of Impact
Current Level of Impact
1. Distribution relative to disturbance regime
a. found only within sites disturbed within the last 3 years
b. found in sites disturbed within the last 10 years
c. found in mid-successional sites disturbed 11-50 years before present (BP)
d. found in late-successional sites disturbed 51-100 years BP
e. found in high-quality natural areas with no major disturbance for 100 years
2. Abundance
a. number of populations (stands)
(1)
few; scattered (<5)
(2)
intermediate number; patchy (6-10)
(3)
several; widespread and dense (>10)
b. areal extent of populations
(1)
<5 ha
(2)
5-10 ha
(3)
11-50 ha
(4)
>50 ha
3. Effect on natural processes and character
a. plant species having little or no effect
b. delays establishment of native species in disturbed sites up to 10 years
c. long-term (more than 10 years) modification or retardation of succession 7
d. invades and modifies existing native communities
e. invades and replaces native communities
4. Significance of threat to park resources
a. threat to secondary resources negligible
b. threat to areas' secondary (successional) resources
c. endangerment to areas' secondary (successional) resources
d. threat to areas' primary resources
e. endangerment to areas' primary resources
5. Level of visual impact to an ecologist
a. little or no visual impact on landscape
b. minor visual impact on natural landscape
c. significant visual impact on natural landscape
d. major visual impact on natural landscape
Total Possible =
B. Innate Ability of Species to Become a Pest
1. Ability to complete reproductive cycle in area of concern
a. not observed to complete reproductive cycle
b. observed to complete reproductive cycle
-10
1
2
5
10
1
3
5
2
3
5
0
3
10
15
0
2
4
8
10
0
2
4
5
50
0
5
Page 21
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Mode of reproduction
a. reproduces almost entirely by vegetative means
b. reproduces only by seeds
c. reproduces vegetatively and by seed
Vegetative reproduction
a. no vegetative reproduction
b. vegetative reproduction rate maintains population
c. vegetative reproduction rate results in moderate increase in population size
d. vegetative reproduction rate results in rapid increase in population size
Frequency of sexual reproduction for mature plant
a. almost never reproduces sexually in area
b. once every five or more years
c. every other year
d. one or more times a year
Number of seeds per plant
a. few (0-10)
b. moderate (11-1,000)
c. many-seeded (>1,000)
Dispersal ability
a. little potential for long-distance dispersal
b. great potential for long-distance dispersal
Germination requirements
a. requires open soil and disturbance to germinate
b. can germinate in vegetated areas but in a narrow range or in special conditions
c. can germinate in existing vegetation in a wide range of conditions
Competitive ability
a. poor competitor for limiting factors
b. moderately competitive for limiting factors
c. highly competitive for limiting factors
Known level of impact in natural areas
a. not known to cause impacts in any other natural area
b. known to cause impacts but in other habitats and different climate zones
c. known to cause low impact in natural areas in similar habitats and climate zones
d. known to cause moderate impact in similar habitats and climate zones
e. known to cause high impact in natural areas in similar habitats and climate zones
Total Possible =
3.2.2
1
3
5
0
1
3
5
0
1
3
5
1
3
5
0
5
0
3
5
0
3
5
0
1
3
5
10
50
Australian WRAS Protocol Details (Pheluong 1995)
While primarily designed for assessing proposed plant introductions to Australia,

Pheloung (1995) sets out details of the development of a national protocol for
screening weediness that can have a direct bearing on the derivation of a regional RAS.
This comprises a three-tiered screening system to evaluate the invasive potential of
proposed plant introductions. Species that pass the first tier ie, are not present on
prohibited or allowed lists and are potential quarantine risks are assessed before entry
is permitted by a second formal Weed Risk Assessment System (WRAS) tier.
The system involves posing 49 questions regarding the species historical,
biogeographical and biological/ecological characteristics (Box 2). Responses are
weighted according to weediness risk resulting in a final numerical score. These
scores permit the list of species to be sorted into a triage of classes. These are (i) those
to be rejected as imports; (ii) those requiring further evaluation; and (iii) those that
appear benign and can be accepted for entry into Australia. A final tier involves the
further evaluation of those species that fell into the second class - a process that usually
involves re-running the existing system with additional, more precise information or by
designating a candidate species for temporary import clearance pending post-entry
evaluations (Pheloung 1995:1).
Page 22
Box 2. WRAS question sheet commissioned by the Australian Weeds Committee & Plant Industries
Committee (Pheloung 1995)
Botanical Name: ..
Common Name:
Outcome: .
Score: .
Answer yes or no, or leave blank unless indicated. Scores for a question typically 1=yes, -1 or 0=no, 0=dont know.
The climate & weed elsewhere sections generate a score using a weighting system: a better climate match increases
the climate weight and a poorer quality match also increases the weight because of greater uncertainty and, therefore,
greater risk. Weed elsewhere responses are multiplied by the climate weight to generate the final score for each
question. (Note: A = agricultural, E = environmental, N = nuisance, C = combined.)
Biogeography/Historical
1. Domestication/Cultivation
2. Climate/Distribution
3. Weed Elsewhere
1.01 Is the species highly domesticated?

1.02 Has the species become naturalised where grown?
1.03 Does the species have weedy races?
(A)
(C)
(C)
2.01 Species suited to Australian climates (0-low, 1-intermediate, 2-high)

2.02 Quality of climate match data (0-low, 1-intermediate, 2-high)
2.03 Broad climate suitability (environmental versatility)
2.04 Native/naturalised in regions with extended dry periods
2.05 Does it have history of repeated introductions outside of its natural range?
(C)
(C)
3.01 Naturalised beyond native range

3.02 Garden/amenity/disturbance weed
3.03 Weed of agriculture
3.04 Environmental weed
3.05 Congeneric weed
(C)
(N)
(A)
(E)
4. Undesirable traits
4.01 Produces spines, thorns, burrs

4.02 Allelopathic
4.03 Parasitic
4.04 Unpalatable to grazing animals
4.05 Toxic to animals
4.06 Host for recognised pests/pathogens
4.07 Causes allergies or otherwise toxic to humans
4.08 Creates a fire hazard in natural ecosystems
4.09 Is shade tolerant at some stage of its life cycle
4.10 Grows on infertile soils
4.11 Climbing or smothering habit
4.12 Forms dense thickets
(A)
(C)
(C)
(A)
(C)
(C)
(N)
(E)
(E)
(E)
(E)
(E)
5. Plant type
5.01 Aquatic
5.02 Grass
5.03 Nitrogen fixing woody plant
5.04 Geophyte
(E)
(C)
(E)
(C)
6. Reproduction
6.01 Evidence of substantial reproductive failure in native habitat

6.02 Produces viable seed
6.03 Hybridises naturally
6.04 Self-compatible or apomictic
6.05 Requires specialist pollinators
6.06 Reproduction by vegetative fragmentation
6.07 Minimum generative time (years)
(C)
(C)
(C)
(C)
(C)
(C)
(C)
7. Dispersal Mechanisms
7.01 Propagules likely to be dispersed unintentionally

7.02 Propagules dispersed intentionally by people
7.03 Propagules likely to disperse as a produce contaminant
7.04 Propagules adapted to wind dispersal
7.05 Propagules bouyant
7.06 Propagules bird dispersed
7.07 Propagules dispersed by other animals (externally)
7.08 Propagules survive passage through the gut
(A)
(C)
(A)
(C)
(E)
(E)
(C)
(C)
8. Persistance attributes
8.01 Prolific seed production (> 2 000 m )

8.02 Evidence that a persistent propagule bank is formed (> 1 yr)
8.03 Well controlled by herbicides
8.04 Tolerates, or benefits from, mutilation/cultivation
8.05 Effective natural enemies present in Australia
Biology/Ecology
(C)
(A)
(A)
(A)
(E)
Page 23
3.2.3
Wildland Weed Priority Ranking System of US Nature

Conservancy (Randall et al., in press)
In an attempt to ensure some consistency in ascribing priority to control of existing
alien species infestations within relatively undisturbed native communities referred
to here as wildlands Randall et al. (in press) have developed a set of criteria to
objectively rank weeds. These criteria relate to four components of a species
invasiveness significance ie, (1) impact on native species, habitats and systems, (2)
ecological characteristics and dispersal capability, (3) distribution and abundance, and
(4) difficulty of management. The system relies on a four-ranked ordinal classification
of I=insignificant, L=low (species represent low threat to native communities),
M=medium (ie, represent a moderate threat), and H=high (species severely degrades
native species and communities or threatens to do so). Scores are associated with these
ranks. It is noted that species that score the highest (i) alter ecosystem processes, (ii)
invade relatively undisturbed native communities, (iii) readily disperse to new areas,
(iv) are widely distributed and abundant where present, and (v) are difficult to control
(Box 3).
Box 3. Criteria and scores of the WWPRS of the US Nature Conservancy (Randall et al., in press)
SECTION 1 IMPACT ON NATIVE SPECIES, HABITATS & ECOSYSTEMS
A.
I.
L.
M.
H.
I.
L.
M.
H.
I.
L.
M.
H.
I.
L.
M.
H.
I.
L.
M.
H.
Ability to invade natural systems

not known to spread into wildlands on its own (eg, species may persist from former cultivation, as in tea,
Camelia sinensis, in the Wet Tropics)
establishes only in areas where major disturbance has occurred in the last 20 years (eg, cyclone damaged
sites and along utility corridors such as highways, powerlines)
often establishes in mid- to late-successional wildlands where minor disturbances such as tree falls and/or
bank slumping may occur but with no major disturbance in 20-75 years
often establishes in intact or otherwise healthy native communities with no major disturbance for at least 75
years.
B. Impact on ecosystem processes
no perceivable impact on ecosystem processes
influences ecosystems processes (eg, has perceivable but mild influence on soil nutrient availability
significant alteration of ecosystem processes (eg, increases sedimentation rates along coastlines, reducing
open water areas important to waterfowl)
major, possibly irreversible alteration/disruption of ecosystem processes (eg, species drains water from
wetland systems making system more fire-prone and incapble of supporting wetland species; species fixes
nitrogen into a nutrient-poor situation making soil less capable of supporting oligotrophic native species)
C. Impact on natural community structure
no impact establishes in an existing stratum without altering structure
influences structure in one stratum (eg, changes density within that layer)
significant impact on at least one stratum (eg, creates new layer; eliminates existing stratum)
major alteration of structure (eg, covers canopy, eradicating all or most layers)
D. Impact on natural community composition
no perceivable impact on native populations
some influence on community composition (eg, reduces number of individuals in one or more native
populations by reducing recruitment, etc.)
significantly alters community composition (eg, produces a significant reduction in the population size of of one
or more species in the community by displacement)
causes major alteration in community composition (eg, results in extirpation of one or several constituent
native species, reduces biodiversity or changes community composition to species exotic to the native
community
E. Conservation of wildland(s) and native species threatened
conservation status of area/constituent species insignificant (eg, extent of human disturbance great and lacks
any rare and/or threatened (r&t) native communities and/or species)
target area contains communities of low significance (ie, habitats are common, widespread and not known to
be r&t nor contain r&t species)
target area is of moderate significance (eg, may contain some high value regional ecosystems and/or species
or good representative examples of intact native communities)
target area is highly significant (eg, contains one or more r&t regional ecosystems and/or r&t species)
Page 24
Impact ranking is achieved by scoring responses addressing parts A. and B. and at least one other part in this
section according to the following:
HIGH = H in A and B; H in A. or B. and M-H in at least one other category; M in A. and B. and H in at least one
other category.
MEDIUM = M in A. or B. and M-H in at least one other category; L in A. or B. and H in at least one other
category.
LOW = if species scores M in at least one other category.
INSIGNIFICANT = all other combination of ascriptions.
SECTION 2 BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS/DISPERSAL CAPABILITY

A. Autecology
Reproduction (tick following checklist)
[]
reproduces readily both vegetatively and by seed
[]
if reproduces by seed, produces >1 000 seeds annually
[]
reproduces more than once per year
[]
rapid growth to reproductive maturity
[]
seeds remain viable in soil for 2 or more years
[]
possesses rapidly spreading culms/stolons/rhizomes that may root at nodes
[]
resprouts readily when cut, grazed or burnt
[]
other.
Competitive ability
[]
highly successful competitor for limiting resources
[]
tolerates a wide range of environmental conditions and/or stress tolerant
[]
ability to germinate in naturally vegetated areas under a wide range of conditions
[]
allelopathic
[]
known to hybridise with native species
[]
lack of predators/control agents in host environment
[]
other
Dispersal
[]
rapid local proliferation of seeds
[]
adapted to long distance dispersal (eg, dispersed by birds; has small water-borne seeds)
[]
other
Impact ranking is achieved by scoring response in the following manner:

I. L. M. H. -
not aggressive has none of the above characteristics or only one or two to a very small extent
somewhat aggressive has one or two of the above to a small extent
aggressive has >2 of the above but only 1-2 to a great extent
extremely aggressive has 3 or more of the above characteristics to a great extent.
B.
Other regions invaded
Is the species known to be invasive beyond its native range in other areas? [list other areas]
C.
Dispersal ability & speed of spread
Speed of spread once reported to have escaped

I.
does not spread
L.
slow doubling time (new local reports) > 50 years
M.
moderate doubling time (new local reports) 10-50 years
H.
rapid doubling time (new local reports) < 10 years.
Current trend in total range within new host country
I.
declining or historical
L.
stable
M.
increasing
H.
increasing rapidly
Potential to be spread by human activity
Is this species frequently distributed or has a high potential to be spread by humans (eg, species is sold commercially
or is spread along transportation/disturbance corridors and/or along waterways)?
Impact ranking is achieved by scoring at least 4 of the 5 response in the following manner: 3 points for H, 2 for
M., 1 for L. and 2 for yes highest score = 13
HIGH = score 9-13; MEDIUM = score 6-8; LOW = score 3-5; INSIGNIFICANT = score <3.
SECTION 3 DISTRIBUTION & ABUNDANCE IN NEW HOST COUNTRY

A.
I.
L.
M.
H.
I
Current range in host country

2
isolated or disjunct range < 100 square miles [260 km ]
2
range 100-10 000 square miles [260 - 26 000 km ]
2
range 10 000 1 000 000 square miles [26 000 26 000 000 km ]
2
widespread (> 1 000 000 square miles [> 26 000 000 km ])
B. Number of distinct protected or similar areas infested in host country
< 5 (few, scattered)
Page 25
L.
M.
H
5-20 areas
21-100 areas
> 100 areas
C. Extent of range that has been identified as problematic by land managers
I.
0-5%
L.
6-20%
M.
21-50%
H.
>50%
D. Potential cover of species in strata where it occurs
J.
infrequent (< 10%)
L.
fair coverage but < 50%
M.
dominant (50-90%)
H.
grows in monospecific stands (90-100%)
Impact ranking is achieved by scoring responses addressing part A. and at least two other parts in this
section according to the following:
HIGH = H in A and M-H in at least one other category; M in A. and H in at least one other category.
MEDIUM = H in A. and L-I in all other categories; M in A. and M in at least one other category; M in A. and L-I
in all other categories; L in A. but H in at least one other category
LOW = if species scores L in A. and M in at least one other category; if scores I in A but H in at least one other
category.
INSIGNIFICANT = all other combination of ascriptions.
SECTION 4 MANAGEMENT POTENTIAL

I.
L.
M.
N.
management not required

management relatively easy and inexpensive; requires minor human and financial resources
management requires major short-term or moderate long-term investment of resources
management requires major long-term investment of resources
Final wildland weed priority ranking is obtained according to the following:

Impact
H=4, M=3, L=2, I=0
AutecologyH=3, M=2, L=1, I=0
Distribution
H=2, M=1, L=0, I=0
Management
H=1, M=0, L=0, I=0
OVERALL SCORE (maximum 10):

0-2
3-4
5-6
7-10
Insignificant threat posed to native communities

Low threat posed to native communities
Moderate threat posed to native communties
High - species represents a major threat to native communities.
While this system addresses a comparable issue to the task at hand, it presupposes a
considerable body of knowledge for any given taxon.
This necessitates an
understanding of both species biology and current distribution. Since control
feasibility is a secondary consideration to innate weediness, only sections I and II are
directly relevant to weed risk assessment per se.
3.2.4
Weed Risk Assessment in Hawaii (Teytaud 1998; Thomas, in

press)
Tropical oceanic islands such as Hawaii are typified by a great degree of endemism,
contain disproportionate numbers of rare and/or threatened species and are particularly
vulnerable to exotic species invasion. Given the extent of risks posed by alien species,
computer-based modelling approaches were developed to assist in prioritising control
actions for already-established weeds. The Hawaiian Ecosystems at Risk (HEAR)
protocol consists of two basic components: (1) a map-based geographic information
system (GIS) incorporating worldwide occurrence and climatic envelope modelling of
host environment to aid in the determination of a weeds potential distribution, and (2)
a multi-factored scoring spreadsheet incorporating Cronk & Fullers (1995) invasive
categories to determine its relative risk (Box 4). The system is heavily reliant upon a
species exhibited invasiveness elsewhere which, it is claimed (Thomas, in press:41),
seems to have produced the most useful results of any weed risk assessment used in
Hawaii to date.
Page 26
Box 4. Categories and ranking system of the Hawaiian WRAS (Teytaud 1998)
A.
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
INVASIVE CATEGORY ELSEWHERE (after Cronk & Fuller 1995)

minor weed of highly disturbed or cultivated land (man-made artificial landscapes)
serious or widespread weeds of highly disturbed or cultvated land (man-made/artificial landscapes)
weeds of pastures managed for livestock, forestry plantations or artificial waterways
serious or widespread weeds of pastures managed for livestock, etc.
invading semi-natural or natural habitats
serious or widespread invaders of semi-natural or natural habitats
invading important natural or semi-natural habitats (ie, species-rich vegetation, nature reserves,
areas containing rare or endemic species)
4.5 serious or widespread invaders of important natural or semi-natural habitats (see above)
5.0 invasion threatening other species of plants or animals with extinction
B.
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
C.
1.
2.
3.
4.
HEARINVASIVE CATEGORIES FOR ALIEN SPECIES PRESENT

invading disturbed land or early successional land other than agricultural landsscapes (ie, whether
disturbed by natural or human-mediated causes)
invading cultivated crops, or man-made pastures managed for livestock
invading forestry plantations
invading relatively undisturbed, non-cultivated, middle to late successional, semi-natural or
natural open habitats (eg, bogs, dunes, grassland, shrubland, savanna, etc.)
natural open woodland habitats
natural closed forest habitats
NEGATIVE IMPACT CATEGORIES FOR INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES PRESENT
invasion of this species is known or expected to cause economic losses on developed agricultural
lands, housing, commercial or industrial areas, developed parklands or recreational areas, or any
other lands whose primary values lie in their socio-economic/cultural rather than ecological features
and assets
invasion of this species is known or suspected to cause significant alterations of the natural fire
regime of ecosystems and/or landscapes; and/or invasion of this species is presently known to cause
significant alterations of energy flows, materials and nutrients cycling, moisture relationships and/or
other critical processes of ecosystems; and/or invasion of this species is presently known to cause
significant alterations of the soil chemistry or the soil erosion characteristics of ecosystems and/or
landscapes
invasion of this species is known or suspected to cause replacement of natural and/or semi-natural
systems of high diversity and/or ecological value with systems of significantly lower diversity and/or
ecological value, when considered under community, ecosystem, landscape, and/or macro-climatic
zone (vegetation zone or biome) criteria; and/or invasion of this species is presently known to pose
some significant direct threat to the well-being of native faunal or floral communities in general, or of
species with some special conservation (eg, rare, threatened, endangered, etc) or ecological (eg,
keystone species) status
invasion of this species is known or suspected to pose some significant threat of local, regional,
insular, state-wide, or global extinction(s) of native species; and/or species having some special
special conservation or ecological status.
SCORING SYSTEM FOR USE WITH THE HEAR RISK ASSESSMENT MODEL (Note: leave categories
blank only if information is unavailable)
Score #1
HIGHEST Cronk & Fuller Invasive Category (for number codes, see above) presently
known for this species ELSEWHERE IN THE WORLD, based on information obtained from Cronk &
Fuller (1995) and/or other literature and/or experet opinion
Score #2
TOTAL NUMBER of different types of Cronk & Fuller Climate Zones presently known to be
occupied by this species ELSEWHERE IN THE WORLD, based on Cronk & Fuller, etc (as above)
Score #3
HIGHEST HEAR Invasive Category presently known for this species on the main Hawaiian
islands based on information from from the literature and/or expert opinion
Score #4
HIGHEST HEAR Negative Impact Category presently known for this species on the main
Hawaiian island based on information from from the literature and/or expert opinion
Score #5
TOTAL NUMBER of different types of HEAR Climate Zones within the environmental
envelope of the species in Hawaii, and presently/potentially invaded by this species on the main Hawaiian
islands calculated using information from the HEAR climate envelope GIS model
Page 27
Score #6
TOTAL LAND AREA (square miles) of HEAR Climate Zones within the environmental
envelope of the species in Hawaii, and presently/potentially invaded by this species on the main Hawaiian
islands calculated using information from the HEAR climate envelope GIS model
Score #7
TOTAL LAND AREA (square miles) of existing Natural/Semi-natural Physiognomic
Vegetation Types (ie, Ecoregional Sub-units or the equivalent to Regional Ecosystems in the Wet Tropics
Bioregion) calculated by intersecting the HEAR climate envelope GIS model with digital map of
Ecoregional Sub-units enter 0 if no such area is believed to be threatened
Score #8
TOTAL LAND AREA (square miles) of Managed Areas potentially invadable if this species
were to attain its potential distribution on the main Hawaiian islands calculated by intersecting the HEAR
climate envelope GIS model with digital map of Ecoregional Sub-units enter 0 if no such area is
believed to be threatened
Although comparable bioregional subdivision of broad environmental zones of the Wet

Tropics (eg, Tracey 1982:2) and native vegetation classification (Tracey 1982; Goosem
et al. 1999) exists, the requirement for sophisticated GIS-based information and
accurate global distributional data limit the applicability of this protocol. The system,
however, is instructive in the ranking categories used and may serve as a model for
future development of computer-based RASs in this and other regions of Australia.
3.2.5 Weed Risk Assessment in the Galapagos Islands (Tye in press)
With a similar situation to Hawaii of a tropical volcanic island archipelago beset by
problems associated with an enormous number of new introductions of alien plants
and animals (Tye in press:19), consideration of an objective weed risk assessment in
the Galapagos is pertinent here. The emphasis here is on naturalised plants ie,
those that are capable of maintaining a population without additional interference
(Tye in press:20) of natural areas, although it is stated that this should not imply
neglect of agricultural pest plants, with the settled areas as major staging points for
invasion into the Galapagos National Park that comprises 96.4% of the total land area.
While most introduced plants appear not to have significantly impaired the ecological
equilibrium of the island over 30 species have established over large areas and/or
appear to be adversely affecting the natural ecosystem to a degree more than simply
occupying space within an existing community (eg, altering community composition or
threatening individual species), or (in a few cases) are already naturalised and known
to be extremely serious invasives in other parts of the world (Tye in press:22). More
than 50 others have naturalised and are not common but have demonstrated invasive
tendencies in other parts of the world. Those considered the worst plants - especially
woody species - are grouped according to the characteristics of their invasions,
particularly area occupied and the nature of their ecological effects.
Tye (in press:22-23) specifies that the groups comprise:
(1) herbaceous or shrubby plants that are invading slowly but whose main effect is to
dominate and replace the native shrub/herb layer (comprising species that were
probable early introductions that have spread widely and other that are either more
recent arrivals or spread more slowly)
(2) herbaceous species including fleshy herbs and grasses that have spread faster or
more extensively that not only replace the herb layer with monospecific stands but
form such a dense carpet severely inhibiting regeneration of shrub/tree layers
(3) scramblers and climbers that have spread rapidly and widely and which have
integrated to some extent into natural communities but which exert at least
intermittent competition and may be having more insidious effects by diminishing
light levels for subordinate native species
Page 28
(4) shrubs or small trees that mostly spread by a combination of seeds and vegetative
means to form dense stands preventing other herbaceous or woody growth
(incidently, this group contains species of Leucaena, Lantana and Rubus that pose
similar problems to native communities of the Wet Tropics)
(5) trees that are invading slowly because they are in the early stages of expansion
and/or have heavy seeds that reduce their dispersal capability but which, because
of their size, will have dramatic impacts on lower growing native vegetation
(Mangifera indica, and to a lesser extent Persea americana, may be considered to
be natural members of this group within the Wet Tropics)
(6) trees that spread rapidy by small wind or animal (particularly bird) dispersed seeds
and which form dense stands (eg, in the Wet Tropics, Spathodea campanulata is
representative of the former sub-group and Psidium guajava of the latter), and
(7) a single herbaceous species the tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) that is
having a unique environemental impact through hybridising with the native
L. cheesmanii and threatening its survival on some islands.
These groups are based on a subjective assessment of what is known of their invasions
and impacts and, in the absence of a formal RAS, can be further ranked in decreasing
order of importance as Group 6 > Group 5, Group 2 > Group 1, with some within each
group meriting higher ranking than others, and so forth. A more objective RAS would
permit more precise comparisons and relative ranking than is possible with this
approach. To this end, an alien plant RAS for Galapagos is currently being developed
based on quarantine screening protocols and a recently formulated system being
implemented in New Zealand (NZDC 1997). The latter, in particular, includes the
following components:
1.
susceptibility of community type potentially affected to specific species

invasion;
2.
significance of effect on system ie, degree of impact on species

composition, regeneration suppression, life-span persistence, etc.;
3.
biological success rating that includes maturation rate, seed production,

seed viability, dispersal capability, establishment and growth rate,
importance of vegetative reproduction; and
4.
additional information including fire risk, competitive ability and

resistance to management (Box 5).
Initiatives currently underway to assist weed control in the Galapagos Islands can
inform the formulation of a Wet Tropics regional RAS. They include a comprehensive
review of pertinent factors (see parts 1-4 of Box 5). It is considered that factors
affecting ability to control a given alien species need not be included in the initial
phase of weed risk assessment to be applied regionally but, rather, are a secondary
consideration. It is first of all important to focus on (1) which species are having or
will have the greatest ecological impact and (2) to reveal which of those species that
are currently restricted, uncommon and/or relatively innocuous that are virtual time
bombs and capable of doing much more than using space (Tye in press:30).
Page 29
Box 5. Criteria included in WRA proposed for Galapagos (Tye, in press)

1. FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO ECOLOGICAL/BIOLOGICAL IMPACT OF INVADER
(a) relatively restricted humid areas more susceptible to invasion by the majority of introduced plants
ie, species capable of invading more than one vegetation zone pose a much greater threat
inclusive of community type potentially affected, distribution and impact and bioclimatic zones
invaded of the NZ system (NZDC 1997)
(b) life-history characteristics of components of vegetation potentially at risk from invasion eg,
endemic species that exhibit periodic seed production and/or germination and/or natural cycles of
death and recovery (boom-bust cycles) can be at risk of invasion during low seed set and/or during
periods where majority of mass mortality
(c) natural perturbations such as storm and fire damage or human-mediated disturbances such as
logging may predispose a system to invasion by species that, for example, exploit canopy gaps.
2.
PHYLOGENETIC CONSIDERATIONS TAXONOMIC UNIQUENESS RATING
(a) taxonomic disharmony (ie, representation of families different from that on neighbouring mainland)
of island floras such that novel taxonomic introductions have the protential to induce profound
changes in the character of the flora
(b) control of invasive species may be limited due to occurrence of close native relatives
(c) hybridisation threats such as in the case of the edible and native tomatos.
3.
BIOLOGY PLANT CHARACTERISTICS THAT AFFECT ABILITY TO INVADE or BIOLOGICAL
SUCCESS RATING
(a) habitat range
(b) rapidity of growth and attainment of maturity
(c) self-compatibility
(d) dispersal ability/vegetative reproduction
(e) life history strategy
(f) other aspects of competitive ability such as allelopathy
4.
ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS as in EFFECT ON SYSTEM OF NZ PROTOCOL (NZDC 1997)
(a) growth habit/tendancy to form monospecific stands eg, trees cause conspicuous and drastic
changes in species composition and habitat structure by suppressing regeneration of subordinate
species, allelopathy and/or by changing the nutrient status (as in N-fixing legumes) or soil water
relations
(b) cryptic effects such as tree introductions to treeless habitats that can induce additional species (eg,
insect pest hosts) invasions
(c) effect on individual native species eg, alien species may impacts severely r&t native species if they
are syntopic and share similar niches
5. FACTORS AFFECTING ABILITY TO CONTROL
(a) availability of control methods
(b) effectiveness and ecological effects of the control methods
(c) cost
(d) social factors eg, as in the political difficulty of removal of one of the most invasive grasses
Pennesetum purpureum that is a valued pasture grass which is also present in the Wet Tropics
(e) possibility of eradication versus continued control ie, strategic eradication of incipient invasions
compared with continued efforts to control widespread species or feasibility considerations of
abundance and spatial distribution
3.2.6
Assessment to determine Weeds of National Significance

(WONS) (www.weeds.org.au ; Thorp 1999)
Although at a greatly different scale, the system devised to differentiate those of
national significance among the large number of weeds already present in Australia is
also analogous to that currently being formulated to rank weeds of the Wet Tropics
region. Prospective WONS are initially nominated by State and Territory agencies and
then independently assessed according to four basic criteria (Box 6). Highest scoring
species are considered and agreement is sought at three ministerial councils on a final
list of twenty species purported to be those of highest national priority. An agreed
national approach comprising the formulation of a national control strategy, which
includes specific action projects, is triggered for each WONS.
Page 30
Box 6. Criteria and weightings allowing identification of WONS

1.
2.
3.
4.
Invasiveness based on an assessment of the biology of the weed and its life history (maximum
weighting 1)
impact characteristics (maximum weighting 1)
potential and current area of spread (maximum weighting 0.5: comprising (i) current distribution
maximum weighting 0.25, and (ii) potential distribution maximum weighting 0.5 )
current primary industry, environmental and socio-economic impacts (maximum weighting 0.75
comprising: (i) current cost of control for agriculture and forestry maximum weighting 0.25, (ii)
environmental index maximum weighting 0.25 [itself comprising species up to 0.0625; communities
up to 0.0625; Interim Biogeographic Regions of Australia regions up to 0.0625; and monoculture
up to 0.0625], and (iii) social index maximum weighting 0.25.
MAXIMUM SCORE = 3.25
3.2.7
Weed Assessment Scoresheet of the Animal and Plant Control

Commission of South Australia (Virtue 2000)
The system developed by the Animal and Plant Control Commission of South
Australia provides for a land use-based treatment of the various weeds within an area
for which responsibility rests with individual Animal and Plant Control Boards. It
employs a series of questions (Box 7) against which responses relating to
invasiveness, impacts and potential distribution of a particular taxon are scored.
Provision is made for a dont know response that is scored zero so as to avoid biases
reflecting information differentials.
Scores ranging from 0-10 are multiplied to provide a weed importance measure with
a maximum value of 1 000. It is recognised that the importance of a particular weed is
a totally separate issue to its feasibility of control and development of a similar scoring
system to direct management efforts is also required.
Since conservation (and tourist presentation) management consititutes a primary land
use for the subject area, provision for such a variety of land uses within the RAS
currently being formulated need not be as explicit. For ease of interpretation, the
Board has been replaced with Area since the focus of the present exercise is to
provide for a RAS pertaining to the World Heritage Area.
Box 7. Criteria and scores of the South Australian WAS (Virtue 2000)
INVASIVENESS
1. What is the weeds ability to establish amongst existing plants?
very high
high
medium
low
SCOR
E
"Seedlings" readily establish within dense vegetation, or amongst thick infestations

of other weeds.
"Seedlings" readily establish within more open vegetation, or amongst average
infestations of other weeds.
"Seedlings" mainly establish when there has been moderate disturbance to existing
vegetation, which substantially reduces competition. This could include intensive
grazing, mowing, light cultivations, clearing of trees, temporary floods or summer
droughts.
"Seedlings" mainly need bare ground to establish, including removal of stubble/leaf
litter. This will occur after major disturbances such as deep cultivation, overgrazing,
hot fires, bulldozing, long-term floods or long droughts.
Note: seedlings include vegetative growth forms and those from spores.
don't know
2. What is the weed's tolerance to average weed management practices in the landscape?
very high
high
medium
low
don't know
2
1
0
?
SCOR
E
3
2
1
0
?
Over 95% of weeds survive commonly used weed management practices.

More than 50% of weeds survive.
Less than 50% of weeds survive.
Less than 5% of weeds survive.
Page 31
3. What is the reproductive ability of the weed in the landscape?

(c) Vegetative
reproduction
1 year
2
high
2
fast
2
2-3 yrs
1
low
1
slow
1
>3 yrs/never
0
none
0
none
0
don't know
?
don't know
?
don't know
?
4. How likely is long-distance dispersal (>100m) by natural means?
(a) Time to seeding
(b) Seed set
high
med.-high
medium-low
low
don't know
(c) Water
(d) Wind
(a) Flying birds
(b) Other animals
2 common
2
2 common
common
common
occasional
1 occasional
1
1 occasional
occasional
unlikely
0 unlikely
0
0 unlikely
unlikely
don't know
? don't know
?
? don't know
don't know
5. How likely is long-distance dispersal (>100m) by human means?
(a) Deliberate spread
(b) Accidentally by
(c) contaminated
by people
people and vehicles
produce
2 common
2
2
common
common
1 occasional
1
1
occasional
occasional
0 unlikely
0
0
unlikely
unlikely
? don't know
?
?
don't know
don't know
IMPACTS
6. Does the weed reduce the establishment of desired plants?
>50% reduction
Total
(a+b+c)
SCOR
E
5 or 6
3 or 4
1 or 2
0
3
2
1
0
?
SCOR
E
3
2
1
0
?
SCOR
E
Total
(a+b+c+d)
2
1
0
?
(d) Domestic/ farm

animals
2
common
1
occasional
0
unlikely
?
don't know
6, 7, 8
3, 4, 5
1 or 2
0
Total
(a+b+c+d)
6, 7, 8
3, 4, 5
1 or 2
0
25-50% reduction
10-25% reduction
<10% reduction
none
Weed prevents establishment of more than 50% of desired plants (eg.

regenerating pasture, crops, planted trees, regenerating native
vegetation), by preventing germination and/or killing seedlings.
Weed prevents establishment of between 10-50% of desired plants.
Weed prevents establishment of <10% of desired plants.
Weed does not affect germination and survival of desired plants.
Weed reduces crop, pasture or forestry yield, or the amount of mature

native vegetation by over 50%.
Weed reduces yield/amount of desired vegetation by 25-50%.
Weed reduces yield/amount of desired vegetation by 10-25%.
Weed reduces yield/amount of desired vegetation by up to 10%.
The weed has no effect on growth of the desired vegetation. Or the weed
may become desirable vegetation at certain times of year (eg. providing
useful summer feed), which balances out its reduction in the growth of
other desirable plants.
medium
low
none
don't know
Weed severely reduces product quality by severe contamination, toxicity, tainting

and/or abnormalities (chemical and/or physical) such that it cannot be sold. For
native vegetation, the weed severely reduces biodiversity such that it is not
suitable for nature conservation and/or nature-based tourism.
The weed substantially reduces product quality such that it is sold at a much
lower price for a low-grade use. For native vegetation, the weed substantially
reduces biodiversity such that it is given lower priority for nature conservation
and/or nature-based tourism.
The weed slightly reduces product quality, lowering its price but still passing as
first grade product. For native vegetation, the weed has only marginal effects on
biodiversity but is visually obvious and degrades the natural appearance of the
landscape.
The weed does not effect product quality.
3
2
1
0
?
SCOR
E
4
3
2
1
0
?
SCOR
E
don't know
7. Does the weed reduce the quality of products or services obtained from the landscape?
high
2
1
0
?
SCOR
E
10-50% reduction
<10% reduction
none
don't know
7.Does the weed reduce the yield or amount of desired vegetation?
>50% reduction
Page 32
1
0
?
8. Does the weed restrict the physical movement of people, animals, vehicles, machinery
and/or water?
high
Weed infestations are impenetrable throughout the year, preventing the physical
movement of people, animals, vehicles, machinery and/or water.
medium
Weed infestations are rarely impenetrable, but slow the physical movement of
people, animals, vehicles, machinery and/or water throughout the year.
low
Weed infestations never impenetrable, but slow movement of people, animals,
vehicles, machinery and/or water at certain times of the year.
none
The weed has no effect on physical movement.
don't know
9. Does the weed affect the health of animals and/or people?
high
medium
low
SCOR
E
3
2
1
0
?
SCOR
E
The weed is highly toxic and frequently causes death and/or severe illness in
people, stock, and/or native animals.
The weed frequently causes significant physical injuries (due to spines or barbs)
and/or significant illness (chronic poisoning, strong allergies) in people, stock,
and/or native animals, occasionally resulting in death.
The weed occasionally causes slight physical injuries or mild illness in people,
stock, and/or native animals, with no lasting effects.
The weed does not affect the health of animals or people.
3
2
1
0
?
none
don't know
10. Does the weed have major, positive or negative effects on environmental health?
scoring for (a) - (f):

(a) food/shelter?
(b) fire regime?
(b) increase nutrient
levels?
(d) soil salinity?
(e) soil stability?
(f)
soil water table?
major
positive effect
1
major
negative effect
1
minor or no
effect
0
don't know
?
Examples of negative effects are Blackberry (Rubus fruticosis) harbouring rabbits

and grass weeds hosting wheat root diseases. An example of a positive effect is
exotic trees providing stock shelter. Ignore pasture for livestock.
This includes changes to the normal frequency, intensity, and/or timing of fires.
Examples of weeds having major effects include exotic grasses invading shrubby
native vegetation.
Eg, legumes can increase soil nitrogen. This may make native vegetation more
prone to weed invasion, but would be beneficial in agriculture. Ignore competition
for nutrients (decreased nutrient levels) as this was covered indirectly above.
Are the leaves of the weed high in salt? Leaf decomposition may increase salinity
at the soil surface. Example plants are iceplant and tamarix.
Does weed increase soil erosion, or silting of waterways?
Does weed substantially raise or lower the soil water table compared to other
plants present? Is this positive or negative? Ignore competition for water.
Total
>3
2 or 3
1
(a + b + c + d + e + f)
SCORE FOR 6.
3
2
1
11. What proportion of the area is suitable for the weed?
> 80%
The weed has a potential to spread to more than 80% of the Area
60-80%
The weed has a potential to spread to 60-80% of the Area
40-60%
The weed has a potential to spread to 40%-60% of the Area
20-40%
10-20%
5-10%
The weed has a potential to spread to 5% and 10% of the Area
<5%
The weed has a potential to spread to less than 5% of the Area
unsuited
The weed is not suited to growing in any part of the Area
don't know
0 or less
0
SCORE
10
8
6
4
2
1
0.5
0
?
WEED IMPORTANCE SCORE

Adjusting invasiveness, impacts and potential distribution scores to range from 0 to 10, and then multiplying these
provide the score for weed importance. The spreadsheet does this. The logic of multiplying is described below.
To calculate manually then adjust the raw scores as follows:
Invasiveness:
Divide by 15 and multiply by 10. Round off to one decimal place.
Impacts:
Divide by 19 and multiply by 10. Round off to one decimal place.
Potential distribution:
Leave unchanged.
Weed Importance = Invasiveness Impacts Potential distribution
Weed importance will have a maximum of 1 000, and a minimum of 0. However, the worst weeds in an Area will
probably score between 250 and 500, and most weeds will score less than 100.
Weeds can be listed from highest to lowest importance score within any given area. However, given the scores are
Page 33
simply an aid to decision-making, it is best to group weeds with similar importance scores, with respect to different
land uses. Weeds could be grouped as follows:
Groupings for Weed Importance score :
1
401-1000
DECREASING
2
201-400
SIGNIFICANCE
3
101-200
4
50-100
5
26-50
6
0-25
Why multiply the invasiveness, impacts and potential distribution scores?
Multiplying gives a greater spread in scores than adding (ie. range from 0-1 000 compared to 0-30).
Multiplying is logical, as it recognises the interactions between the criteria. If the impacts of a weed can be
measured in dollars per hectare per year, the potential distribution is known in hectares, and the invasiveness
(ie. rate of spread) is measured in terms of the increase in hectares compared to the previous year:
Impact
Potential Distribution
Invasiveness
$ / hectares / year
hectares
hectares(current year) / hectares (previous year)
When multiplying, all of the hectare units cancel so that weed importance is measured in total dollars per year. In
multiplying the invasiveness, impacts and potential distribution criteria scores, we are mimicking the above
calculation, without having the actual dollar and hectare figures.
3.3
Basic Elements of a Weed RAS
Some workers (eg, Swarbrick, in Binggeli et al. 1998:22) in the area express
considerable doubt as to whether invasiveness can be adequately predicted and claim
that, given the right set of circumstances, any plant can become a weed. Despite the
justifiable skepticism, it is important to formulate systems that can provide some
indication of weediness risk. Any potentially useful system must include a basic set of
elements against which potential or existing plant introductions can be assessed.
Three basic factors ie, species characteristics, disturbance regimes and environmental
factors - are critical considerations in weed assessment (Binggeli et al. 1998:2). In
addition there are various other aspects of the host environment (or extrinsic factors)
that require evaluation in any system designed to rank exotic plants according to risks
posed, especially in light of the conservation management obligations within the Wet
Tropics region. Moreover, the manner in which an exotic species is introduced to the
recipient land (Maillet & Lopez 2000:12) can, along with the basic attributes of the
plant, the ecological characteristics of the host environment and the extent of
disturbance, determine the nature and speed of invasion.
Clearly there are certain intrinsic biological traits predisposing species to potential
invasiveness (Goodwin et al. 1999:423). However, it has been demonstrated by
Maillet & Lopez (2000:23) that no set of characters is common to weedy exotic
species. The ideal weed, it is argued by Noble (1989:302), is a plastic perennial
which will germinate in a wide range of physical conditions, grow quickly, flower
early, is self-compatible (ie, not possessing a specialised pollination system), produces
many [persistent] seeds that disperse widely, reproduces vegetatively and is a good
competitor. Goodwin et al. (1999:423) note also that it is important for successful
invaders to possess seeds that can germinate without pretreatment (as in vernalisation)
and that there should be short intervals between large seed crops. Noble (1989:308)
goes on to argue that the perenniality of a plant is little evidence of its invasive
potential in stable environments. Moreover, species that have long-lived seed pools
may pose great problems for weed control/eradication but that is a separate issue from
the prediction of invasiveness itself. Patently, traits relating to a species reproductive
Page 34
and growth system, dispersal capability3 and competitive ability are valuable indicators
of potential invasiveness and should feature prominently in any effective RAS.
Competitive ability, however, is not easily established precisely without field trials
under a range of conditions and other experiments. It may be inferred from extensive
observations elsewhere, and it is more likely that aspects of a plants gross biology,
that includes observations on life form, growth, reproduction and dispersal, will be
better documented in the existing literature and, therefore, more readily accommodated
within a RAS. Consideration of intrinsic traits for use in the proposed Wet Tropics
RAS is included within Section 4.2 below.
Despite the enormity of the problem of weed invasion, it is evident that most exotic
species tend to remain associated with areas of gross human disturbance, whereas
only a few establish in stable, natural vegetation (Maillet & Lopez 2000:12).
However, these do indeed pose major threats. Noble (1989:309) stresses that it is the
invaded environment, as much as the properties of the invading species itself, that
determine invasion success. These are of particular pertinence in the HEAR system
(see Box 4 above), are included in the ESRS (Box 1) and the WWPRS (Box 3), and not
only relate to degrees of disturbance that predispose systems to invasion, but also relate
to the special conservation status of species and ecological communities. Specific host
environment or extrinsic factors are incorporated within the proposed Wet Tropics
RAS as set out in Section 4.3 below).
Weediness elsewhere is regarded widely as one of the best predictors of invasiveness.
Citing Reichards (1994) work, Binggeli et al. (1998:23) reinforce this determination
on the basis of a comparison of 235 invasive species with 114 other introdutions that
failed to establish and spread. They claim that at present, species known to be
invasive elsewhere in he world under similar climatic conditions is still the best
predictor of invasiveness. It is appropriate that, immediately subsequent to
establishing whether a species is indeed native or exotic (as is the case with some
agricultural weeds rather than alien species that are environmental weeds within
natural systems), the extent to which it or a related (congeneric) species has
demonstrated invasiveness elsewhere must be evaluated.
Noble (1989:310) comments that while short-distance dispersal will increase both the predictability and rate of invasion,
that absence of inherent long-distance dispersal capacity is not a hindrance to invasiveness since humans are the main
vector. In short, it seems that species with a high reproductive output (even if unsuccessful) in native habitat have high
invasive potential, with large flowering and fruiting effort being the first clue to a successful invader (Noble 1989:306).
Page 35
4.0
Tailoring a Weed Risk Assessment System for the Wet

Tropics Bioregion
The basic requirement of this exercise is not to screen potential imports but to evaluate
species already present that currently or potentially constitute major environmental
weeds. This is to serve as a basis for allocation of limited area management resources
within (and presumably about) the Wet Tropics WHA. In fact, this exercise can be
considered analogous to the calibration/validation testing of the WRA system proposed
for import screening use (Pheloung 1995:8). Analagous also, albeit at a different scale,
is national assessment of weeds already present in Australia.
Just as two critical numeric scores are used by import screening authorities to reject,
further evaluate or accept proposed introductions, a similar approach to ranking exotic
species may allow the differentiation among highest priority, sleeper and relatively
benign weeds that can prompt control and/or eradication, careful monitoring and
minimal strategic control management actions, respectively. The fact that protected
area boundaries and especially those often irregular and discontinuous ones that
characterise the Wet Tropics WHA - are not recognised by plants (and most animals)
means that the evaluation was conducted on a bioregional basis rather than confining
attention strictly to the WHA itself. Also any RAS that will have explicit management
utility must be tailored to fit both the invader and the invadee: ie, the autecological
and life history attributes of the species as well as the biotic and abiotic attributes of
the ecosystems being protected (Ewell 1986:228).
In the proposed RAS it is appropriate to aim at consistency with other approaches and
to derive a system that is robust, simple to apply and transparent. Hence, there is good
reason for a useful system being highly derivative, drawing closely upon those
elements of RASs in use or under development elsewhere to benefit from earlier expert
opinion. Moreover, data now being gathered on a vast range of plant taxa in such
compendia as the Global Invasive Species Database (Fondation dEntreprise Total
2000 issg@auckland.ac.nz ), and others associated with tropical woody weeds (eg,
Binggeli et al. 1998), are compatible with such systems and therefore more amenable
for inclusion in any purpose-built RAS when screening species not known locally.
In an assessment of invasiveness there are two fundamental questions: (1) what are the
biological characteristics of an invasive species; and, (2) how does that allow us to
predict what species will be invasive? Biological traits including reproduction,
establishment, growth, dispersal, and competitive ability, genetic plasticity are know to
be fundamentally indicative of invasive potential (see Section 3.3). While there are
many gaps in detail, these are explicit, whereas impacts and extrinsic attributes of the
host environment are less so. Williams & West (2000:428) list a group of key
attributes of plants that indicate a potential for weediness in native ecosystems. These
are set out in Table 4.
As well as intrinsic (known biological attribute) factors there are extrinsic
(environmental, etc) factors that require consideration ie, critical landscape features
and species and communities at risk. Consideration is given below as to how such
attributes are employed within existing systems that are used to determine
environmental weed risk. It is, however, intended that more explicit understanding of
the peculiarities of the subject region and special aspects of its ecology and constitutent
communities and species be explicitly accommodated in the RAS.
Page 36
Table 4: Characteristics of plants that are indicative of a potential for weediness in natural
ecosystems (after Williams & West 2000:Table 3).
high input of viable propagules
short (<2 years) development time to reproductive maturity
seeds/other reproductive units with prolonged (>5 years) periods of dormancy/residency in seed bank
high rate of aerial or subterranean biomass production, particularly under conditions of low light, water
and/or nutrient availability
dense and spreading foliage/canopy
efficient long distance (>1 km) dispersal capaiblity
presence of interspecific allelopathic properties and/or absence of intraspecific allelopathic properties
successful coloniser of disturbed or bare ground
reproductive strategies that facilitate survival in fire-prone environments
broad distribution over a range of distinct climatic types
low suceptibility to attack by phytophagous organisms
4.1
Insights into Weed Invasions in the Tropics
With respect to woody weed invasion in the tropics, Goodland et al. (1998:8/2) argue
that every invasive event is unique and is affected by the species distinctive set of
attributes and specific local environmental factors and biological communities.
There are, however, certain characteristics that predispose plants for weedy behaviour.
In fact, these traits are often those for which plants have been introduced as robust
agricultural or ornamental adventives. Consideration of the most diagnostic of those
intrinsic traits is a fundamental requirement of any effective RAS.
In a major global review of woody invasive species in the tropics, Binggeli et al.
(1998:14-15) note that birds are the major dispersal agents of the most invasive weeds
and are implicated in the spread of 43% of those species considered. Wind dispersal is
of secondary significance, accounting for dispersal of 20% of those species. It is
appropriate, therefore, that dispersal mode and distance (along with some measure of
propagule production) be incorporated into the Wet Tropics RAS. Pointers to
invasiveness in tropical environments include (i) high habitat disturbance and broad
ecological amplitude; (ii) short generation time; (iii) high reproductive output; (iv) high
diffusivity (dispersal capability); and (v) high numbers of invading individuals
(Binggeli et al. 1998:22).
4.2
Consideration of Intrinsic (Biological) Traits
Selection of critical assessment criteria and elements thereof is vital to a successful

RAS. From the review of the various systems above it was possible to consider the
extent of incorporation of critical intrinsic biological attributes (Table 5).
Inspection of Table 5 suggests that attributes directly related to reproductive capacity
and mode are most commonly used indicators of invasiveness. These traits, along with
those associated with dispersal capability and mode, are used in all but one of the
systems reviewed. Demonstrated weediness of a species or its congener elsewhere is
also frequently used to assess weed risk. Establishment needs and life form/niche are
less common components, but are nonetheless diagnostic in some RASs.
Page 37
Table 5: Treatment of intrinsic traits amongst the various risk assessment systems reviewed
Intrinsic Attribute
Specific Assessment
System
it/congener
elsewhere a
weed
known level of
life form
and/or niche
ESRS of US
Department of Interior impact in natural
areas, habitats,
National Parks Service climates
(Hiebert &
Stubbendieck 1993)
Australian WRA
protocols (Pheloung
1995)
climates in
distribution
introduction
history
extent naturalised
beyond native range
congeneric weed
type of weediness
exhibited
WWPRS of US Nature
Conservancy (Randall
et al., in press)
is species known
to be invasive
elsewhere?
Weed Risk Assessment

in Hawaii (Teytaud,
1998; Thomas, in
press)
Weed Risk Assessment
in the Galapagos
Islands (Tye, in press)
invasive category
elsewhere
where invading
[habitat range]
Assessment to
determine WONS
(Thorp 1999)
Weed Assessment
Scoresheet of the SA
Animal/Plant Control
Commission (Virtue
2000)
4.3
existence of
undesirable traits
(eg, thorns, burrs)
plant type
(aquatic, grass,
geophyte, N-fixer)
climbing or
smothering growth
habit
reproductive
capacity and
mode
extent of
completion of
reproductive cycle
mode
extent of
vegetative reprod.
frequency of
sexual reprod.
No. of seeds per
plant
reproductive
success
seed production,
longevity &
viability
self-compatibility
reproduces by
vegetative
fragmentation
pollination
minimum
generative time
mode
seed production
seed viability
rate of spread
dispersal
mode and
capability
potential of long
distance dispersal
establishment needs
ditribution in
relation to
disturbance regime
germination
requirements
dispersal mode
(wind, water, bird
and/or intentional/
unintentional
human dispersal)
weed of disturbed
areas, agriculture or
environmental weed
tolerant of or
benefits from
mutilation and/or
cultivation
extent of local
proliferation
long distance
dispersal potential
extent to which it
establishes in
disturbed and.or
successional areas
dependence on
disturbance
life history
strategy
[habitat range]
rapidity of growth dispersal ability

& attainment of
maturity
vegetative
reproduction
self-compatibility
[component of
[component of
invasiveness
invasiveness
criterion]
criterion]
maturation time
extent of ssed set
rate of vegetative
reproduction
likelihood &
mode of longdistance dispersal
likelihood &
mode of humaninduced dispersal
dependence on
disturbance
Consideration of Extrinsic Factors
Appreciation of the fact that invasiveness and risk is not only dictated by inherent alien
plant qualities but also by attributes of the host environment led also to an evaluation
on the extent to which these were utilised among the various screening/ranking
systems (Table 6). All systems reviewed included an assessment of impact or threat to
native communities (and generally to native species) or alluded to attributes such as
sociability (as in able to grow in monospecific stands) and/or allelopathy and toxicity.
Table 6: Treatment of extrinsic traits amongst the various risk assessment systems reviewed
Page 38
Extrinsic Attribute
Specific
Assessment System
distribution
ESRS of US
Department of
Interior National
Parks Service
(Hiebert &
Stubbendieck 1993)
Australian WRA
protocols
(Pheloung 1995)
spatial pattern of
infestation (ie,
widespread,
scattered)
areal extent
WWPRS of US
Nature
Conservancy
(Randall et al., in
press)
current range
(area)
No. of
infestations
abundance
environmental
tolerance
[incorporated in
distribution
attribute]
[related to
disturbance regimes
& successional
status]
climate match
environmental
[incorporated
partly in rate of
spread]
Weed Risk
Assessment in
Hawaii (Teytaud,
1998; Thomas, in
press)
Weed Risk
Assessment in the
Galapagos Islands
(Tye, in press)
Assessment to
determine WONS
(Thorp 1999)
[incoporated in
abilty to grow in
monospecific
stands]
current area of
spread
Weed Assessment
Scoresheet of the
SA Animal/Plant
Control
Commission
(Virtue 2000)
versatility
shade tolerance
grows on infertile
soils
competitive ability
includes tolerance of
a range of conditions
effect on native
communities
and/or species
threat to or
endangerment of park
resources
modification of
system succession or
ecosystem replacement
[related to system
successional
modification or
replacement]
forms dense thickets

allelopathic
toxic to animals
creates a fire
hazard in natural
ecosystems
influence on
degree of
alteration of system
processes (eg, soil
nutrients, & water,
sedimentation rates,
fire-proneness)
community structure
potential cover of
species in strata where
it occurs (able to grow
in monospecific stands)
influence on
community
composition
conservation
status/significance of
community or species
at risk
[partly included in
known/suspected to
assessment of
cause replacement of
economic losses on
natural/semi-natural of
developed
high diversity, etc.
agricultural,
known/suspected to
housing, commercial pose significant threats
& industrial lands]
or extinction to native
floral or faunal
communities or species
with special
conservation status
habitat range
capability of
cause conspicuous or
potential area of
spread
[weighting imposed
proportional to bioregional significance
of species or
communities]
does weed prevent
establishment of
desired vegetation?
extent of reduction in
biodiversity so as make
area unsuitable for
nature conservation
toxicity to native
animals
invading >1 veg.

zone
effect on system
processes
drastic changes in
community
composition
has cryptic effects
(eg, trees in treeless
communities)
severely impacts on
native r&t species
known/suspected
to cause significant
alterations of
natural fire regimes
of native
communities,
energy flows,
materials or mineral
cycling, moisture
relationships or
other critical ecosystem processes
cause drastic
changes in habitat
structure (eg
tendency to form
monospecific
stands) by
suppressing recruitment or by allelopathy or changing
nutrient status
[possibly
incorporated in
previous attribute]
does weed have
effect on food,
shelter, fire regime,
nutrient levels, soil
salinity/erosion,
silting of waterways
or soil watertable?
Most systems also incorporated assessment of actual or potential impact on system

processes particularly with regard to modifications of fire regimes and to a lesser
extent to nutrient and moisture relations. In the Hawaiian WRAS (Teytaud 1998) there
is also reference to the criticality or significance of ecosystem processes that operate
Page 39
and that are, or can be, modified by invasion of exotic species. Clearly, this is a vital
component of an appropriate RAS against which invasive species can be ranked.
However, in the cases of exotic species that have yet to establish in the novel
environment, assessment depends upon the existence of information about their
occurrence in other places and ecosystem impacts that have occurred as a result.
Environmental tolerance, while interpretable as an intrinsic rather than extrinsic
attribute, can relate to properties of the host environment as well as to an exotic
species capacity to exploit those properties. Such attributes are indicative of plantenvironment interactions that reflect not only autecological aspects but also host
environment properties. In some instances this factor is included as a matching
exercise between the climates or landsystems of a plants native range and those of the
host environment. The HEAR system employs a sophisticated GIS matching of such
factors and similar comparative systems (eg, BIOCLIM/ANUCLIM, CLIMATE,
CLIMEX Kriticos & Randall in press) are either employed or under development in
Australia for the prediction of potential weed distributions that can be used to rank
species and to direct management efforts. In the interest of ease of application,
inclusion of this attribute in the proposed RAS is explicitly confined to assessment of
exotic aquatic plants as the versatility component, although it is, in part, associated
with the intrinsic attribute, competitive ability, in that part of the RAS applied to
terrestrial species.
Other factors that are again somewhat equivocally included in the extrinsic category
relate to properties of populations of exotic plants already present in a recipient
environment. Factors such as distribution and abundance, therefore, differentially
contribute to the assessment process and are dependent upon the stage of invasion of a
species. These attributes are occasionally employed in RASs but are more commonly
encountered in ranking schemes to inform weed management priorities. Despite this,
assessment of current distribution and abundance of existing weeds can reflect not only
stage of invasion but propensity to invade (and therefore point to risk) and can provide
a link between weed risk assessment and management.
4.4
Ranking Methodology
The proposed Wet Tropics RAS constitutes a scoresheet or questionnarie that is

comparable to those utilised in the various systems reviewed. Each species is allocated
a score dependent upon whether or not it possesses certain attributes or according to
responses to various questions relating to pertinent attributes. Details of the system are
set out explicitly in Table 7.
A staged or stepped approach that permits the elimination of low risk taxa was adopted
that allowed the segregation of native species from exotics, and thereafter the
separation of species of disrupted systems (that are themselves a symptom rather than a
cause of change) from species that are causal agents of change. The system was
designed to be consistent with other approaches, robust, relatively simple to apply
(especially given limited biological information for some taxa) and transparent.
Moreover, a scoring system was incorporated whereby numeric values were
proportionate to environmental risk with a maximum possible value of 100 providing a
useful notional percentage score that is generally interpretable by a range of people.
Page 40
Table 7: Proposed Wet Tropics Weed RAS

STEP 1: Determine whether species is native.
YES STOP
NO go to step 2
STEP 2: Is the species a weed elsewhere?
YES
widespread major weed (score 5)
known to be weedy (score 4) go to step 3
NO
Does it have one or more congeners that are weedy?
YES
congener(s) aggressive (score 3)
congener(s) weeds only of disturbed systems (score 2) go to
step 3
NO (score1)
go to step 3
STEP 3: Is the species aquatic?
YES
go to 3A
NO
go to 3B
3A
ASSESSMENT OF AQUATIC TAXA
A1: Mode of reproduction: rhizome ! fragmentation ! budding! turions ! stolons ! tubers! seeds !
Total checked ______ [maximum = 5]
A2: Numbers of reproductive organs produced year 1 individual 1
very high - >1000 (score 10); high - 100-1000 (score 7); medium 10-100 (score 3); low - <10 (score 1)
A3: Dispersal capability
Dispersal outside catchment by natural agents (score maximum of 5 if propagule is well adapted for wind/bird
dispersal; score 1 if it could be spread in a bird crop or on feathers and intermediate values conforming to degree of
adaptation)
Dispersal outside catchment by accidental means (score max. of 3 if spread by three means (drainage machinery,
boat trailers, nets)
Dispersal outside catchment by deliberate introduction (score max. of 2 if attractive as ornamental or aquarium plant
to humans)
A4: Versatility
Temperature: (score 0-3) maximum score if frost tolerant; 2 if growth checked in winter; 1 if dies back in winter; 0
if killed
Depth tolerance: (score 1-3) max. if grows from deep (>5m) water to dry land; 2 if shallow water -wetland; 1 if
restricted by either
Substrate tolerance: (score 1-2) max. if grows on a range of substrates and/or oligotrophic/eutrophic water; 1 if
restricted by either
Water clarity: (score 0-2) maximum if unaffected by water clarity (as in case of floating macrophytes); 1 if growth
diminished by turbid water; 0 if drastically reduced.
A5: Damage to Natural Areas/Systems
Biodiversity reduction (0-5) maximum for forming monospecific rafts/patches and displacing native species with
reducing score for lessening impact
Water quality reduction: (0-3) maximum for major impacts, particularly deoxygenation of waterbodies by floating
aquatics with reducing score for lessening impact
Impairment of physical processes: (0-2) maximum for significant impacts on hydraulic capacity, substrate stability,
sedimentation and/or flooding with reduced score for lessening impact
ADD SCORES FOR STEPS 2 & THEN A3-A5 - MULTIPLY BY 2 TO PROVIDE A TOTAL SCORE OUT
OF 100
STEP 3B ASSESSMENT OF TERRESTRIAL (including SEMI-AQUATIC) TAXA
STEP 3 Gross invasiveness: What is the species ability to establish among existing plants?
very high seedlings readily establish within dense vegetation or amongst thick infestation of other weeds (score 5)
go to step 5
high seedlings readily establish within more open vegetation or amongst average infestations of other weeds
(score 4) go to step 5
medium seedlings mainly establish when there has been disturbance (tree clearing, mowing, temporary floods or
droughts) to existing vegetation (score 3) go to step 5
low seedlings mainly need bare ground to establish - eg, litter removal with cultivation, overgrazing, fire (score 2)
go to step 4
dont know (score 1) go to step 4
Note: seedlings include vegetative growth forms and, as in ferns, those from spores.
STEP 4 Does the species pose specific problems for native wildlife? NO STOP
Yes go to step 5
STEP 5 ASSESSMENT OF INTRINSIC (BIOLOGICAL) TRAITS
Tick the following checklist:
5.1 Reproduction:
! reproduces readily both vegetatively and by seed ! if reproduces by seed produces >1000 p.a.
! reproduces more than once per year ! rapid growth to reproductive maturity ! seeds remain viable for 2 years
! possesses rapidly spreading culms/stolons/rhizomes that may root at the nodes! resprouts readily when cut! other
5.2 Competitive ability: ! highly successful competitor for limited resources ! tolerates a wide range of
environmental conditions and/or is stress tolerant ! has ability to germinate in naturally vegetated areas under a wide
range of conditions
! is allelopathic ! lacks predators/control agents in its host environment! other
Page 41
5.3 Dispersal capability: ! rapid local proliferation of seeds ! adapted to long distance (eg, dispersed by birds;
has small water-borne or wind-borne seeds) ! other (eg, is adapted to medium distance dispersal by other animal
vectors)
ADD EACH TICK to give an accumulated score and rank accordingly:
extremely aggressive has 10 of the above traits and several ( 5) to a great extent score 15; go to step 6
very aggressive ie, has 5-9 of the above characteristics with 3 to a great extent score 10; go to step 6
potentially aggressive ie, has >3 of the above but only 1-2 to a great extent score 5; go to step 6
rarely aggressive ie, has 1-2 of the above to some extent score 2; go to step 6
relatively benign ie, has none of the above characteristics on only 1-2 to a very small extent score 1 STOP
STEP 6 ASSESSMENT OF EXTRINSIC (HOST ENVIRONMENT) FACTORS
6.1 Conservation status of communities/species at risk from invader
area at risk from invasion is highly significant ie contains 1 endangered Regional Ecosystem/species score 5
area at risk is significant ie, contains 1 of concern/vulnerable Regional Ecosystem/species score 4
area at risk is of moderate significance ie, may contain endemic species/good representative ecosystems score 3
area at risk contains communities of low significance eg common/widespread habitats, no r&t species score 2
conservation status of area insignificant ie, extent of human impact considerable, native species residual score 1.
6.2 Ability to disrupt native ecosystem function
major, possibly irreversible alteration/disruption of ecosystem processes (eg, fire-sensitive system more fire-prone,
chokes drainage channels, fixes nitrogen in oligotrophic system, drains wetland) score 5
significant alteration of system processes (eg, increases sedimentation rates, reduces open water habitat, shades
canopy, understorey and/or groundcover) score 3
some influence on ecosystem properties (eg, a perceivable but mild influence on soil nutrients) score 1
no perceivable impact on ecosystems processes/impact unknown score 0
6.3 Ability to disrupt ecosystem structure
major alteration of structure ie, covers canopy, forms monospecific stands eradicating most layers score 5
significant impact on one or more strata creates new layer or eliminates an existing stratum - score 4
significantly invades/replaces a single stratum - eg invades/eliminates groundcover or understorey score 3
influences structure in one stratum eg, changes density within a layer score 2
no structural impact establishes in existing stratum without altering stratification/density greatly score 1
6.4 Ability to disrupt native ecosystem composition
causes major alteration in floristics ie, results in extirpation of one or more native species, reduces native
biodiversity or facilitates increased exotic species representation score 5
significantly alters community composition ie, produces a significant population reduction in one or more native
species by displacement score 4
produces some influence on floristic composition reduces one or more native species population by reducing
recruitment score 3
little perceivable impact on native populations score 1
6.5 Current abundance in area
large populations with extensive (>20% of region) distributions score 5
large populations with widespread (10-20% of region) distributions score 4
moderate populations with relatively restricted and/or patchy distributions score 3
small populations with few significant infestations score 2
small populations with limited and/or very sparse distributions score 1
ADD SCORES FOR STEPS 2-3 & 5-6, MULTIPLY BY 2 TO PROVIDE A TOTAL SCORE OUT OF 100
The primacy of the weed elsewhere attribute is clearly acknowledged by Reichard (in
press). Similarly, Rejmnek (in press) argues the importance of a species or a congener
of a species having demonstrated weediness in similar environments and that this
knowledge is very powerful in predicting invasive potential. Accordingly,
immediately after the initial screening step to dispense with native species, a ranking
was given to taxa that have exhibited weedy tendencies elsewhere (and to what extent)
or have congeners that are known weeds.
Champion & Clayton (in press:192) argue clearly for the basic distinction between
obligate aquatic and terrestrial species, especially given that many of the attributes
scored in general RAS models are not relevant to aquatic plant assessment, and provide
a risk assessment model specifically designed for the former. Hence, once preliminary
screening was conducted to determine exotic status and whether a species or its
congener(s) exhibited weediness, the aquatics and terrestrials (including some
emergent wetland species of non-obligate hydrophytes) were dealt with separately.
Page 42
The relative importance of each attributes contribution to overall risk is not well
understood. Therefore each is regarded as basically equivalent in the ranking system.
The rationale here is that relative weightings introduce greater measures of subjectivity
into the system and, thus, were avoided/underplayed. Thereafter the system regards
each component attribute as generally equivalent but incorporates an ordinal measure
of relative significance using staged scores (eg, extremely aggressive score 15; very
aggressive 10; potentially aggressive 5, and so forth) within a specified range.
With regard to extrinsic factors, it may be argued that one attribute, eg, ability to
disrupt ecosystem function or relative significance of the conservation status (ie,
endangered, vulnerable/of concern) of communities and/or species at risk, is of
higher significance than others. In the absence of any accepted means to differentiate,
each was scored iteratively to contribute to a final score.
Assessment of conservation status allowing invasion risk to be scored according to
communities and/or species at risk from the alien invader ie, endangered versus of
concern in the case of Regional Ecosystems (REs) or endangered and vulnerable in
the case of species, were drawn from official lists. These are Goosem et al. (1999) for
communities (REs) as in the Vegetation Management Act (1999) or according to
Wildlife Schedules of the Nature Conservation Act (1994) for species (also listed in
Goosem et al. 1999).
There was a certain dilemma regarding the inclusion of attribute 6.5 ie, current
abundance (Table 7) since this normally is associated with control feasibility than
risk per se. In this case, however, it served as a measure of host environment
susceptibility to date to this invader and a useful extrinsic criterion to score against.
The omission of economic impact, management costs and similar socio-economic
criteria that are often incorporated into other weed screening systems (eg, Randall et al.
in press, Tye in press, Virtue 2000) was intentional. Intuitively, these are secondary
considerations to inherent invasiveness potential and more appropriately considered
subsequently to environmental risk per se in order to prioritise weed species for
management action. Moreover, this is the approach generally employed to rank
agricultural pests where monetary values of crop production and pest control are more
tangible rather than in assessing environmental weeds.
The extent to which the proposed RAS provides a sensitive indication of
environmental weed risk now requires evaluation. Consequently, it is intended to
screen a sample of exotic species that have naturalised within the bioregion as a first
step in this evaluation process. Relative rankings can then be considered in
comparison with existing lists of prioritised invasive species such as those identified as
the worlds worst species (Fondation dEntreprise Total 2000), species classified as
WONS and the results from the application of other similar weed classification
systems. Furthermore, it is intended that eventually all naturalised species within the
Wet Tropics Bioregion will be processed using this system so that a greater number of
comparative rankings can be evaluated. It is also suggested that the proposed system
be circulated for expert comment in order that any deficiencies can be identified and
remedied prior to its wider application.
Page 43
5.0
Evaluation of Plant Species Naturalised within the Wet

Tropics Bioregion
5.1
Emendations to Current List of Regionally Naturalised Species
Current assessment of weeds within the Wet Tropics Bioregion and the extensive
portion of that bioregion that comprises the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area was
based initially on the provision of a list of naturalised exotics from the EPAs WildNet
database. This was subsequently revised and replaced with a list based on
interrogation of the HERBRECS herbarium records database. The list contained
508 taxa comprising 475 species. Subsequently, 29 other exotics known locally to have
naturalised were included, resulting in a total of 504 species (Appendix 2)
Taxonomic nomenclatural changes are ongoing and frequently confound
comprehensive listing and assessment of plants. While it is not proposed to include
nomenclatural authorities with those taxa examined, an attempt has been made to
incorporate the most up-to-date taxonomic revisions and nomenclatural changes. This
process has been assisted greatly by B. Waterhouse (pers. comm.). Nomenclatural
changes include Wedelia trilobata to Sphagneticola trilobata, Duranta repens to
D. erecta; Praxelis clematidea is known now as Eupatorium catarium and E. riparium
is replaced by Ageratina riparia; Hiptage madablota is also no longer current and has
been superceded by H. benghalensis. Since the Queensland Herbarium is yet to
endorse the shift of genus to Urochloa (Waterhouse, pers. comm.), Par Grass will
continue to be referred to as Brachiaria mutica pending taxonomic reconsideration.
5.1.1 Additional Inclusions
Other species known locally to be naturalised, but due to lag time for processing
specimens and/or lack of collection, were not included on the official list have been
added to the list of taxa to be evaluated (Appendix 2). This process was based on the
authors knowledge of species occurrences within the region and was assisted greatly
by the extensive knowledge of exotic species possessed by colleagues (especially
B. Waterhouse of AQIS, D. Boorman and A. Small). Species not officially noted as
naturalised within the bioregion but included for risk assessment are listed in Table 8.
Several are regarded as doubtfully naturalised by the Queensland Herbarium.
5.1.2 Exclusions
No attempt was made to evaluate those infra-specific taxa that were included on the
official list of naturalised exotics. This somewhat masks important genotypic
differences that may have a bearing on invasiveness; however, due to resource
limitations it was not considered appropriate to differentiate.
Such exclusions include, for example, the three varieties of Mimosa pudica, and
similarly those for Emilia sonchifolia and others, that have been treated as a single
taxon. In addition, M. invisa is synonymous with M. diplotricha, and therefore is
excluded from the evaluation, and so forth.
Concatenation of infraspecifics reduces the original list of 508 taxa to 475 (including
hybrids). With the addition of the 29 species known locally to have naturalised but not
officially recorded (Table 8), a grand total of 504 exotics require evaluation using the
RAS (see Appendix 2). It should be recognised, however, that this total is almost
certainly an underestimate and the list should be reviewed regularly to remain current.
Page 44
Table 8: Additional taxa known to have naturalised within the Wet Tropics Bioregion but not
recorded in official (Queensland Herbarium) list of naturalised exotics.
FAMILY
SPECIES
Common Name
Origin
ACANTHACEAE
Barleria rosea
ANACARDIACEAE
Schinus terebinthifolia
Pepper Tree
Central America
APOCYNACEAE
Cascabela thevetia
South America
ARACEAE
ARECACEAE
Epipremnum aureum (syn.

Scindapsus aurea)
Syagrus romanzoffiana
Yelow Oleander,
Captain Cook Tree
Golden Devils Ivy
Queen Palm
Trop. America
ASTERACEAE
Mikania micrantha
Mile-a-minute
Trop. America
COMMENLINACEAE
Zebrina pendula
CUCURBITACEAE
FABACEAE
Momordica charantia
Inga sp.
Balsam Pear
Icecream Bean
(palaeotropics)
Trop. America
FABACEAE
Macroptilium atropurpureum
Siratro
Trop. America
HYDROCHARITACEAE
Elodea canadensis
Pondweed
North America
MARANTACEAE
Thaumatococcus daniellii
Sweet Prayer Plant
Tropical (West)
Africa
MELIACEAE
MELIACEAE
MIMOSACEAE
Azadirachta indica
Chukrasia velutina
Acacia nilotica
Neem Tree
Mahogany
Prickly Acacia
India
Indo-malaysia
Tropical Africa
MORACEAE
Artocarpus ?communis
Jackfruit
Indo-malaysia
MYRSINACEAE
MYRTACEAE
Ardisia sp.cf. humilis (may

be = A. solanacea)
Eugenia dombeyi
Gramachama Cherry
Trop. America
MYRTACEAE
Eugenia uniflora
Brazil Cherry
Trop. America
PINACEAE
Pinus caribaea
Caribaean Pine
Trop. America
POACEAE
POACEAE
Andropogon gayanus
Hymenachne amplexicaulis
Gamba Grass
Hymenachne
Tropical Africa
Trop. America
POACEAE
Saccharum spontaneum
Wild Cane
Indo-malaysia
POACEAE
Sporobolus pyramidalis
Giant Rats-tail
Africa
POLYGONACEAE
Triplaris surinamensis
and/or T. americana
Ant Tree
South America
RUBIACEAE
Coffea liberica
Tree Coffee
Tropical Africa
RUBIACEAE
Musenda frondosa
SAPINDACEAE
Blighia sapida
Akee
Tropical Africa
SAPOTACEAE
Chysophyllum cainito
Star Apple
South America
South-east Asia?
South-east Asia
Central America
South Asia?
Tropical Africa
Comments
noted naturalising in Cairns
area from ornamental roadside
plantings (Boorman pers.
comm.)
infestations about the Wild
River, Herberton
syn. Thevetia peruviana
patchy infestations known
garden escapee establishing
along creeks
invasive along Priors Ck and
about Atherton
one of worlds worst weeds
infestations in Mission Beach
area treated
garden escapee establishing as
groundcover in forested gullies
widespread weedy vine
escapee from cultivation
introduced as food plant
widespread introduced pasture
legume
second record only for Qld
from Mazlin Ck, Atherton
(Werren , unpub. data)
natural sweetener; - showing
signs of invasion of
Whyanbeel area (Stanton pers.
comm.)
invasive in drier areas
escapee from plantations
WONS - as above (noted by
Boorman, pers. comm.)
noted in area by Boorman
(pes. comm.)
invading about Cairns City
(Boorman, pers. comm.)
Stanton (unpub.) notes this
food plant as naturalising
naturalising in various places
(see Werren 1998)
widely planted timber tree
spreading from plantations
introduced pasture grass
ponded pasture species now
a WONS
noted doubtfully naturalised
by Qld Herbarium
recorded on Tableland by
Sullivan (Little pers. comm.)
naturalising in Bramston
Beach area noted in Cairns
CC PMP
spreading in Daintree area
(Boorman, pers. comm.)
noted by Herbarium as
doubtfully naturalised
(Guymer pers. comm.)
naturalising in Bramston
Beach area (Jensen, pers.
comm.)
spreading in forests along
footslopes of the McAlister
Range behind Palm Cove
(Small pers. comm.)
tropical fruit plant nvading
about Kamerunga (Stanton
pers. comm.)
Page 45
5.2
Existing Species that Pose Major Area Management Problems
Earlier consideration of the extent of weeds in the bioregion (Humphries & Stanton
1992) resulted in a list of eight species that were viewed as current or potential major
environmental weeds. Swarbrick (1993a, 1993b, 1993c) focussed on five of those high
priority weeds in subsquent investigations of distributions, autecologies and control
treatments. While all eight were discovered invading native vegetation communities
without being assisted by gross disturbance, some appear more problematic than others
(eg, Pond Apple) and risks associated with some (eg, Clitoria laurifolia, Sanchezia
parvibracteata) seem, at least subjectively, to have been over-emphasised. This
constitutes a problem in the weed risk assessment field since different expert
approaches will apply different experiences and approaches to the same task. What is
required is a system that is less subjective, and while qualitative rather than
quantitative, can be applied by a range of individuals according to an agreed protocol.
A more recent exercise (Bebawi pers. comm.) has imposed some ranking of a subset of
the >500 introduced species known to have naturalised within the Wet Tropics region.
This has involved the ranking using a Multiple Objective Decision Support System
(MODSS) of the range of species addressed in ten Pest Management Plans (PMPs)
developed by the various local governments that span the bioregion (Table 9)
Table 9: List of the top 31 (30 exotics and 1 native species) Wet Tropics weeds that were
prioritised by MODSS. Species selection was based on the priority ratings given in the shires
and Cairns Citys Pest Management Plans (Bebawi pers. comm.).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Scientific name
Common name
Mikania micrantha
Chromolaena odorata
Mimosa diplotricha
Eupatorium catarium
Thunbergia spp.
Miconia calvescens
Annona glabra
Alternanthera philoxeroides
Andropogon gayanus
Cabomba caroliniana
Stachtarpheta spp.
Harungana madagascariensis
Senna obtusifolia
Elephantopus mollis
Cyperus aromaticus
Psidium guajava
Leucaena leucocephala
Brachiaria mutica
Spathodea campanulata
Hyptis spp.
Rottboellia cochinchinensis
Euphorbia heterophylla
Allamanda cathartica
Turbina corymbosa
Sphagneticola trilobata
Tithonia diversifolia
Sansevieria trifasciata
Eichhornia crassipes
Pistia stratiotes
Salvinia molesta
Mikania
Siam weed
Giant sensitive plant
Praxelis (syn. Praxelis clematidea)
Thunbergia
Miconia
Pond apple
Alligator weed
Hymenachne; Ponded pasture grass
Gamba grass
Cabomba
Snakeweed
Harungana
Sicklepod
Tobacco weed
Navua sedge
Guava
Leucaena
Para grass
African tulip tree
Knob weed; Stinking roger; Comb hyptis
Itch grass (Note: considered by most to be native)
Milk weed
Yellow allamanda vine
Turbine vine
Singapore daisy
Thithonia
Mother-in-laws tongue
Water hyacinth
Water lettuce
Salvinia
Page 46
Some of the more aggressive species that were deliberately introduced for stock forage
(except Hymenachne, Gamba Grass and Leucaena) are missing from this list (Table 7).
This is understandable since there has been a certain retiscence within local
government PMPs to consider useful (agricultural) plants especially pasture grasses
and legumes - that can also contitute major environmental weeds, either because of
policical (constituency) considerations and/or because of their ubiquity. However,
consideration of these within any comprehensive RAS is certainly warranted and it is
intended to supplement the test sample with examples of these taxa.
5.2.1 Natural groups of naturalised species based on habit/life
forms
The primary division of plants is into aquatic versus terrestrial categories. Champion
& Clayton (in press) argue for the distinctiveness of aquatic plants and for this primary
differentiation. Naturalised exotic aquatics within the region are set out in Table 10.
The seven aquatic macrophytes listed comprise three floating, two submerged and two
semi-emergent, species. Introduced ponded pasture species are essentially semiaquatic and will be considered within the larger group of terrestrial species. Emergent
semi-aquatic introduced species are also not included.
Table 10: Exotic aquatic macrophytes that have naturalised within the Wet Tropics region.
SPECIES
FAMILY
Common Name
Comments
AMARANTHACEAE
Alligator weed
semi-emergent
Cabomba caroliniana
CABOMBACEAE
Cambomba
submerged a WONS
PONTEDERIACEAE
Water hyacinth
floating
Elodea canadensis
HYDROCHARITACEAE
Pondweed
submerged
Pistia stratiotes
ARACEAE
Water lettuce
floating
Sagittaria graminea ssp.

platyphylla
ALISMATACEAE
Arrowhead
semi-emergent
Salvinia molesta
SALVINIACEAE
Salvinia
floating
The larger group of terrestrial plants can be further subdivided into natural groups
based on life form or habit. In a major review of tropical woody weeds, Binggeli et al.
(1998) have classified a provisional list of 235 invasive species into (1) trees > 15m
tall, (2) small trees 5-15m, (3) shrubs < 5m, (4) sub-shrubs (some parts somewhat
woody), and (5) vines. Non-woody species can be subdivided similarly into
meaningful groups such as herbs/forbs, graminoids and ferns.
More or less informal functional groups might be identified for the Wet Tropics in a
manner similar to those identified as indicative of different levels of risk and
invasiveness in the Galapagos (Tye in press:22-23). These comprise:
(i)
herbaceous/shrubby plants that are invading relatively slowly and whose main
effect is to dominate/replace the natural shrub/herb layer of more open
communities eg, Stachytarpheta spp., Hyptis spp.;
(ii)
graminoids and herbaceous species that are spreading rapidly or more

extensively replacing the herb layer with a monospecific stand and seriously
inhibiting or precluding recruitment of tree and shrub layers eg, Guinea Grass,
Page 47
Gamba Grass, Molasses Grass and other introduced pasture grasses (note also
that these promote highly modified fire regimes);
(iii)
scramblers and climbers that have spread widely and, to some extent, have
become integrated into the natural communities the foremost of these being
Chromoleana odorata, Mikania micrantha, Turbina corymbosa, Thunbergia
spp., Sphagneticola trilobata and Solanum seaforthianum that have insidious
effects, while others such as exotic Passiflora spp., Mimosa diplotricha,
Momordica charantia and Allamanda cathartica exert at least intermittent
competition and can form dense mats to adversely affect the growth of a range of
native species;
(iv)
shrubs and small trees that form dense stands preventing other herbaceous or
woody growth eg, Leucaena leucocephala, Lantana camara, Miconia
calvescens and Murraya paniculata cv exotica (in the case of Leucanea and
Lantana, invasion can also cause major modifications to the natural fire regime);
(v)
trees that are invading slowly and/or more insidiously because they are sleepers
in the early stages of invasion or are more cryptic/less conspicous eg,
Parmentiera aculeata, Mangifera indica, Flacourtia jangomas, Blighia sapida that, while most have not yet necessarily caused serious ecological damage, pose
major threats by virtue of their size, or in the case of some such as Cucumber
Tree, can form dense monospecific stands displacing native species;
(vi)
trees which spread rapidly by small wind-borne or animal (particularly bird see
Wilkinson 1999) dispersal and which can form dense stands eg, Pond Apple,
Spathodea campanulata, Castilla elastica, Pinus caribaea, Psidium guajava and
Harungana madagascariensis that may have already established over wide
areas and threaten to displace native communities; and
(vii)
a miscellanous group or category that has particularly adverse interactions with

native species, as in the case of exotic species of Aristolochia that is toxic to
native papillionids such as the Ulysses Butterfly, or as for non-native congeners
that may be able to hybridise with native species.
Plants can also be grouped into taxonomically related groups that may also have
consistent morphological/physiological expression. These groups may also share
attributes that confer a measure of invasiveness. Grasses ie, the family Poaceae
are one such group. During development of the AQIS system, expert comments such
as grasses should not be grouped together as guilty of weediness by association
(Pheloung 1995:16) were contributed. Some criticism of this approach was also
apparent during course of the weed risk assessment workshop held in Adelaide during
1999 (see Virtue in press). This was noted but not generally accepted because of the
comparative reliability as an indicator of risk given the large proportion of weedy
species within this natural group.
It is assumed here that this conclusion will apply to the large number of Wet Tropics
plant introductions. For instance, African C4 grasses have been implicated in
significant and often debilitating changes to the natural fire regimes of host
environments (Baker 1986, Vitousek 1986, Mooney & Drake 1989, Macdonald et al.
1989, Smith 1989). Wallmer (1994) has documented the high flammability of
Molasses Grass (Melinus minutiflora) and, to a slightly lesser extent, Guinea Grass
within this region. It is likely that a host of other related exotic grass species will
produce similar modifications to natural fire regimes.
Page 48
Asteraceae is another family that contributes a disproportionate number of weedy taxa,

including at least 830 species from 224 genera (Heywood 1989:35). Asteraceous
species are advanced from an evolutionary viewpoint and, due to the development of
biological features that ensure survival under adverse conditions and a high
reproductive rate, combined with complicated and efficient dispersal systems, are often
highly invasive. Chemical factors, including anti-herbivore agents and toxins and
allelopathic constituents, area also important to this familys competitive success.
Heywood (1989) further specifies that after these two leading plant families in terms of
weedy species contributions, Fabaceae (and related legume families Caesalpineaceae
and Mimosaceae) comes next, contributiong more than 400 species from over 85
genera). Thereafter, there is a list of 11 families that each contributes over 100 weed
species. These are the Euphorbiaceae, Lamiaceae, Brassicaceae, Convolvulaceae,
Cyperacaeae, Solanaceae, Apiaceae, Rosaceae, Scrophulariaceae, Polygonaceae and
Malvaceae.
In the Draft Wet Tropics Plan (WTMA 1995), some undesirable plants in the World
Heritage Area are specified according to taxonomic association. Examples include all
non-native species from the family Acanthaceae Passiflora spp. (exotics). This
approach was enshrined on Schedule 2 in subordinate legislation 1998-161 of the Wet
Tropics World Heritage Protection and Management Act (1993) with ratification of the
Plan in 1998 (Queensland Government 1998).
An initial classification was performed on the terrestrial species according to their
predominant life form (Appendices 2 and 3). The categories comprised trees, shrubs
(including scandent shrubs such as Chromoleana odorata), vines, herbs (including
fleshy herbs such as aroids and gingers), grasses and others (predominantly ferns, fern
allies). Although widely planted as ornamentals within the region, only a single exotic
palm species is considered to possess weedy tendencies. This is the Queen Palm,
Syagarus romanzoffiana. It has naturalised about Atherton and is invasive of both
rainforests and more open forests about creek lines such as along Priors Creek.
5.2.2
Natural groups of naturalised species based on origins
It is apparent from quarantine risk surveys (Williams et al. in press) that particular
locations furnish disproportionate numbers of invasive species. Williams & West
(2000:427) note that since the onset of European settlement there has been a gradual
shift over time in the countries of origin of most Australian weeds. Initially, European
countries were major sources and reflected the cultural biases and the need to be
surrounded by familiar plants and animals from the mother countries that was
enshrined in institutions such as acclimatisation societies. More recently, weeds of
American origin predominate in Queensland and, in Australia as a whole, Africa and
the Americas are the source continents of plants naturalised over the past three decades
(Williams & West 2000:427).
One of the reasons for undertaking the current exercise is that the Wet Tropics is rather
anomalous when compared with the rest of Australia and the RASs developed in other
parts of the country are unlikely to be directly applicable here. Correspondingly, the
origins of invasive species within this region are also likely to be different when
compared to those characterising other parts of Australia - particularly temperate
south-east regions. While some species with temperate origins will flourish on the
regions cooler Tablelands, and expansive dry country ones along the drier western
fringes of the bioregion combined with tropical stock forage grasses and legumes
Page 49
throughout, more exotic ornamental garden escapees are likely to be candidates for
environmental weed classification. These can come from a range of different
continents that impinge on tropical latitudes, particularly tropical America, Asia and
Africa. For example, of the 29 additional plant species known to have naturalised
regionally but not recorded on the Herbariums list (Table 6), 13 (45%) are from
tropical (ie, Central and South) America and seven (24%) each from Indo-Malaysia
(extending from India to South-East Asia) and tropical Africa. None are from
traditional sources such as Europe (including the Mediterranean) and western Asia.
5.2.3
Other groups of naturalised species based on predisposition

to invade systems at risk
Ponded pasture species such as Hymenachne and Par Grass, along with other
extremely aggressive species such as Pond Apple and Leucaena, present particular
problems due to their ability to invade wetland (including riparian) systems. These
(see Section 2.5 above) are not only especially vulnerable to exotic species invasion
but have been disproportionately cleared and/or disrupted regionally and support many
of the endangered and of concern REs (see Table 2). Vines are also problematic due
to their ability to invade riparian systems and to blanket valuable rainforest remnants.
5.2.4 Groups of naturalised species resulting from application of the
RAS to the sample
Weed assessment is regarded by most agencies (eg, Pheloung 1995:1) to require
between 1-2 days per individual taxon. Time and resource limitations therefore
precluded the assessment of all alien plant species known to have naturalised within
the Wet Tropics region (Appendix 2, including additional taxa in Table 8). Since there
are only seven aquatic plant species known to have naturalised within the region, all
were processed using the proposed system. The results of this are set out in Table 11.
Table 11: Ranking of exotic aquatic macrophytes (excluding ponded pasture species) using the
proposed Wet Tropics RAS
Alligator Weed
Cambomba
Weed
elsewhere
5
5
Reprod.
mode
2
2
Nos of
reprod
organs
3
3
Dispers.
capacity
3
6
Versatility
7
7
Water Hyacinth
Elodea canadensis
Pondweed
Pistia stratiotes
Water Lettuce
Sagittaria graminea ssp. platyphylla
Arrowhead
Salvinia molesta
Salvinia
SPECIES
Common
Name
Cabomba caroliniana
8
8
Score
(%)
56
62
10
74
64
68
64
66
Damage
For the terrestrial (including semi-aquatic) species, it was proposed initially to rank
every tenth taxon (ie, a 10% sample) on the emended list. In consultation with the
Senior Principal Scientist of the Wet Tropics Management Authority, a revised
approach was determined. It was agreed that a useful sample of taxa to trial a pilot run
of the scheme would be those identified by DNR as the 31 taxa (excluding the
aquatics) drawn from regional shire-based Pest Management Plans rated as highest
priorities for weed research (Table 9). These taxa were supplemented to a maximum
of 50 taxa with additional species drawn from the emended list of naturalised aliens to
represent other better known species from some apparently underrepresented groups
(eg, the single weedy palm tree, fruit plants and other ornamentals). The sample
assessed with the proposed Wet Tropics RAS is set out in Table 12.
Page 50
Habit4
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
stop
special
Step
4
5.3
10
15
10
15
10
15
10
10
15
10
Score
5
6.5
12
18
14
11
12
18
17
15
14
13
16
13
11
10
10
21
18
14
19
Score
6
42
68
50
46
62
70
82
62
74
58
38
82
64
38
44
50
38
90
64
48
76
Total
X 2 (%)
Table12: Sample of terrestrial species, sensu lato, assessed using the RAS specifically developed for the Wet Tropics region.
16. Sphagneticola trilobata
15. Tithonia diversifolia
14. Mikania micrantha
13. Eupatorium catarium
12. Elephantopus mollis
11. Chromolaena odorata
10. Ageratum conyzoides
9. Ageratina riparia
8. Aristolochia ringens
7. Syagrus romanzoffiana
6. Syngonium podophyllum
5. Allamanda cathartica
4. Annona glabra
3. Mangifera indica
2. Sansevieria trifasciata
1. Thunbergia spp.
Bignoniaceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Aristolochiaceae
Arecaceae
Araceae
Apocynaceae
Annonaceae
Anacardiaceae
Agavaceae
Acanthaceae
ButterflyTree
African Tulip
Cucumber Tree
Singapore Daisy
Japanese Sunflower
Mile-a-minute
Praxelis
Tobacco Weed
Siam Weed
Mother-in-laws Tongue
laurel vines
Ss
Ss
Tt
TT
TT
SS
stop
21. Cleome aculeata
20. Senna obtusifolia
19. Bauhinia monandra
18. Spathodea campanulata
Cucurbitaceae
Convolvulaceae
Capparaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Spiderweed
Yellow Allamanda
17. Parmentiera aculeata

Bignoniaceae
Sicklepod
22. Turbina corymbosa
6.4
10
4
Balsam Pear
Turbine Vine
23. Momordica charantia
6.3
TT
TT
40
6.2
6.1
5.2
Pond Apple
Mango
TT
5.1
Queen Palm
SS
Common name
Dutchman's Pipe
SS
10
Family
Mistflower
Species
Bluetop
Ss
Cyperaceae
Navua Sedge
24. Cyperus aromaticus
Page 51
Codes used to specify life-forms/habits are as follows: TT = large tree; Tt = small tree/tall shrub; SS = often tall woody shrub; Ss = subshrub and/or non-woody shrub; H = herb (including fleshy herbs
and graminoids); and, V = vine (including some very scandent shrubs).
Ss
Habit4
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
stop
stop
Step
4
5.3
2
stop
10
Score
5
6.5
11
12
Score
6
12
46
56
18
Total
X 2 (%)
Milkweed
V
48. Mutingia calabura
47. Solanum seaforthianum
46. Selaginella vogelii
45. Cardiospermum halicacabum
44. Murraya paniculata cv exotica
43. Rottboellia cochinchinensis
42. Panicum maximum
41. Hymenachne amplexicaulis
40. Brachiaria mutica
39. Andropogon gayanus
38. Passiflora foetida
37. Psidium guajava
36. Eugenia uniflora
35. Mimosa diplotricha
34. Leucaena leucocephala
33. Azadirachta indica
32. Miconia calvescens
31. Persea americana
Verbenaceae
Verbenceae
Tiliaceae
Solanaceae
Selaginellaceae
Sapindaceae
Rutaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Passifloraceae
Myrtaceae
Myrtaceae
Mimosaceae
Mimosaceae
Meliaceae
Melastomataceae
Lauraceae
snakeweeds
Golden Dewdrops
Tree Strawberry
Brazilian Nightshade
Peacock Fern
Balloon Vine
Mock Orange
Itch Grass
Guinea Grass
Hymenachne
Par Grass
Gamba Grass
Stinking Passionfruit
Guava
Brazil Cherry
Giant Sensitive Plant
Leucaena
Neem Tree
Miconia
Avocado
Ss
SS
Tt
SS
Tt
SS
Ss
Tt
Tt
Tt
TT
stop
stop
10
10
2
stop
-
10
10
10
10
15
10
15
10
13
11
20
22
21
18
20
11
20
11
15
54
48
40
60
20
40
72
80
74
64
40
78
34
44
88
58
80
16
6.4
Butterfly Pea
1
3
6.3
Euphorbiaceae
Siratro
6.2
Fabaceae
6.1
25. Euphorbia heterophylla

Fabaceae
TT
5.2
26. Clitoria ternatea
Harungana
H
Ss
5.1
27. Macroptilium atropurpureum

Clusiaceae
Red Salvia
knob weeds
Common name
28. Harungana madagascariensis

Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Family
29. Hyptis spp.
Species
30. Salvia coccinea
1
stop
1
stop
15
49. Duranta erecta
Page 52
50. Stachytarpheta spp.
5.3
Consideration of Aquatic Weeds
It was decided at the outset to consider aquatic plants separately from the terrestrial
species utilising a different RAS. All seven exotic aquatic macrophytes known to
have naturalised within the Wet Tropics region are weeds elsewhere and therefore
receive the maximum score for this criterion of the RAS. Each differs slightly in
relation to other criteria and although the range of resulting scores (56-74 - Table 11)
is not nearly as large as for the terrestrial (including some wetland) species, there is
some indication that Water Hyacinth poses the greatest risk followed by the other two
floating aquatics, Water Lettuce and Salvinia. The submerged species rank
intermediately with the semi-emergent Alligator Weed ranking lowest. It is notable,
however, that all scores exceed 50 which is, in the case of the terrestrial species, a
high score indicative of significant environmental risk. Regionally, however, this risk
posed may not be as serious when compared with that in other regions owing to the
reliable Wet Season flood flows that normally flush the stream systems of the floating
aquatics and scour the semi-emergent and submerged ones.
5.4
Consideration of the Worst Terrestrial Weeds
Those 11 species from the sample with the highest scores (ie, _ 70) from an
environmental weed viewpoint, are those posing the greatest risks to natural systems
of the Wet Tropics Bioregion. These are, in decreasing order of assessed risk, Pond
Apple, Leucaena, Siam Weed, Singapore Daisy, Miconia, Hymenachne, Guava,
Thunbergia spp., Mikania, Par Grass, Guinea Grass and Cucumber Tree. The top
risk cohort includes two weeds that have been rated as of national significance
(Section 5.5 below). All have exhibited extremely aggressive weedy tendencies
elsewhere and/or are currently extremely aggressive weeds of the region, and, in the
case of Hymenachne, Par Grass and Guinea Grass, are very aggressive and greatly
impair ecosystem function. Arguably, these are clearly transformer species (sensu
Richardson et al. 2000:102) ie, invasive species that can change the character,
condition, form or nature of a natural ecosystem over a substantial area.
Several of these are also included a list of the worlds 100 worst alien invaders
(Fondation dEntreprise Total 2000) that includes 32 terrestrial plant species5. These
are Siam Weed (ranked 23rd), Leucaena (ranked 45th), Miconia (ranked 52nd), Mikania
(ranked 54th) and Singapore Daisy (which ranked 100th). Moreover, two of these
species were included on a highest-priority quarantine risk target list compiled by
AQIS (Waterhouse & Mitchell 1998) either prior to their entry to Australia as in the
case of Mikania, or because of the serious risk of reintroduction of Siam Weed. In the
latter case, its relatively restricted infestations were targetted by an eradication
program and, assuming the possibility of eradication, quarantine weed status was
required to ensure vigilence against its re-entry (Waterhouse pers. comm.).
The prevalence of purposefully introduced stock fodder species in the highest scoring
risk cohort is alarming, particularly in view of the continued promotion of Leucana by
primary industry support agencies and the continued cultivation and distribution of
seeds of Par Grass and Guinea Grass within the region. Prior to its elevation to
WONS status in 2000, Hymenachne was also promoted for use as a ponded pasture
species and was cultivated for distribution of its seeds.
5
The list of the worlds 100 worst invasive species comprises 32 land plants, 4 aquatic plants, 8 species of
micororganism (eg, banana buncy top virus), 26 invertebrate species, 8 fishes, 3 amphibians, 2 reptiles, 3 bird species
and 14 mammals (Fondation dEntreprise Total 2000).
Page 53
Those species that ranked with scores between 60-69 comprise Turbina corymbosa,
Parmentiera aculeata, Mangifera indica, Ageratina riparia, Andropogon gayanus,
Tithonia diversifolia, Spathodea campanulata and Solanum seaforthianum. Some
have demonstrated aggressive invasive properties elsewhere (eg, Mango, Gamba
Grass and African Tulip Noble 1989, Binggeli et al.2000), all but Cucumber Tree,
and to a lesser extent, Turbine Vine, are relatively widespread, and all have
demonstrated a high measure of invasiveness in relatively intact forest systems of the
region. The use of fruit from Cucumber Tree and Mango, as well as the widespread
dispersal of at least the latter by cassowaries (Casuarius casuarius johnsonii), fruitbats (Pteropus spp.) and Feral Pigs (Sus scrofa), accounts for its very extensive
distribution within moderately intact forests of the region. Ecologically, this
constitutes factor reinforcement that often sees mutually advantageous interaction of
alien species in this case, a plant and animal (Vitousek 1986:172). The ornamental
African Tulip and Brazilian Nightshade also possess well-developed long distance
dispersal capabilities (wind and bird dispersed seeds respectively) and are already
greatly invasive of intact native communities.
Taxa that ranked in the next score cohort (ie, 50-59) include Eupatorium catarium,
Azadirachta indica, Harungana madagascariensis, Stachytarpheta spp., Syngonium
podophyllum and Senna obtusifolia. This group corresponds to either widespread
invasive species of disturbed forest (as in the case of Praxelis, Snakeweed and
Sicklepod) or to invasive species occurring over a moderately limited area (eg,
Mistflower, Neem Tree, Harungana, S. podophyllum). Since Groves (1999:635)
argues that sleeper weeds fall somewhere between those recent incursions with a
high invasive potential known from their behaviour in other regions and the species
that have already become weeds of national significance, it is likely that these, and
some others in the previous group (ie, scores 60-69), are such.
Those species scoring between 40-49 include Sansevieria trifasciata, Duranta erecta,
Bauhinia monandra, Hyptis spp., Syagrus romanzoffiana, Mimosa diplotricha,
Momordica charantia, Cyperus aromaticus, Passiflora foetida, Murraya paniculata
cv exotica and Mutingia calabura. Several of these species exhibit invasiveness in
comparatively limited areas within the region and may be considered sleeper weeds;
while others (eg, the sedge, Hyptis spp., M. diplotricha, Balsam Pear6 and the
passionfruit) occur over more extensive areas where it is likely that disturbance has
enhanced their proliferation advantaging their invasive potential. It is considered that
below the score of 50 obtained by screening taxa using the newly devised RAS, the
environmental risk appears to be less serious and/or less pervasive.
A small group of four species fell in the range of scores just below 40 to 34
whereupon there was a significant natural gap in the ranked distribution. These
comprise Allamanda cathartica, Aristolochia ringens, Elephantopis mollis and
Eugenia uniflora. This is a diverse group comprising two ornamentals (Allamanda
and Dutchmans Pipe), a predominantly agricultural weed (E. mollis) and the birddispersed fruiting shrub, Brazil Cherry that is known to be naturalising at various
locations (eg, Werren 1998). These, and many others awaiting assessment, may
warrant consideration as sleeper weeds (see 5.6 below).
6
It is important to note that Balsam Pear (Momordica charantia) is the favoured host of the Melon-fly (Batroceras
cucurbitae) that is a quarantine pest occasionally incurring in islands of the Torres Strait (Waterhouse pers. comm.).
Should this insect reach the Wet Tropics, infestations of Balsam Pear would almost certainly facilitate its invasion and
greatly reduce the likelihood of success of any eradication program such as that which was successfully mounted against
its congener the Papaya Fruit-fly (B. papayae) within the region. This observation may confer more importance on the
control of this exotic plant regionally.
Page 54
Those lowest ranked species (with scores 20) are, with the exception of the
Avocado (Persea americana), essentially exotic ruderals, annual garden escapees or
weeds of disturbed places (eg, Cleome aculeata, Macroptilium atropurpureum). The
native Rottboellia cochinchinensis, that is almost exclusively an agricultural weed of
canefields, scored zero. The risk of any of these becoming major environmental
weeds appears to be inconsequential. Conspicuous infestations may constitute
aesthetic problems and inhibit the presentation of World Heritage values but are
assessed as little more than that.
5.5
Assessment Results and Weeds of National Significance(WONS)
Nine species accorded Weeds of National Significance (WONS) status have

naturalised with the Wet Tropics Bioregion. These are Acacia nilotica, Alternanthera
philoxeroides, Annona glabra Cabomba caroliniana, Cryptostegia grandiflora,
Hymenachne amplexicaulis, Lantana camara, Parthenium hysterophorus and Salvinia
molesta (Williams & West 2000:430). Those five representatives in the sample of the
nine weeds present in the region so classified scored highly due to their inherently
invasive traits and, secondarily, their extent of infestations. Those scored in the trial
run were A. glabra (90 the highest scoring of the 50 terrestrial species rated),
H. amplexicaulis (80), and the three aquatic species - Salvinia molesta (66), Cabomba
caroliniana (62) and Alternanthera philoxeroides (56). Reasons for the low scores
for the aquatics were set out in Section 5.2.4 above). Four WONS species (ie, Acacia
nilotica, C. grandiflora, L. camara and P. hysterophorus) were not included in the
trial sample. It is therefore argued that the trail of the proposed Wet Tropics RAS has
produced plausible results with respect to the WONS component of the species trial.
5.6
Consideration of Sleeper Weeds
Maillez & Lopez-Garcia (2000:12-13) note that there is clearly a lag time between
introduction and commencement of invasion and that a minor weed today may
become a major one in the future. The term sleeper weeds is defined as those
invasive plants that have naturalised in a region but not yet increased their population
size exponentially (Groves 1999:632). These are species which, while currently not
considered problematic, may be in the early phases of an explosive invasion. Groves
(1999:632) considers that these sleepers comprise a numerically large subset of the
invasive biota of Australia and deserve enhanced attention from research scientists
and resource agencies. Rozefelds & MacKenzie (1999:581), in their review of the
history of weed invasion of Tasmania, conclude by stating the seed for the next wave
of weed invasions has, unfortunately, already been sown and that most of the
previously considered adventives, sparingly established species or species with
status uncertain (ie, comparable to doubtfully naturalised category currently used
by the Queensland Herbarium) will eventually become established as weeds.
Given their current status, many sleeper weeds are not readily identifiable within the
list of >500 naturalised exotics in the region without further scrutiny. These, if not
identified as major problems elsewhere, may be detected by careful evaluation of their
intrinsic biological traits, including their environmental versatility and by seeking a
match between native and host environments.
Of those species screened, several appear to conform to the definition of sleepers.
These comprise Syagrus romanzoffiana, Bauhinia monandra, Eugenia uniflora,
Murraya paniculata cv exotica, Muntingia calabura and Duranta erecta. Most have
not yet become widespread problems, although several are considered problems at
Page 55
particular localities, but since all but one have fleshy fruits that are bird-dispersed,
they are are likely to become so in the not too distant future.
It was previously noted that Allamanda cathartica, Aristolochia ringens, and
Elephantopis mollis may also belong to such a category. It is significant that Elephant
Weed and Yellow Allamanda are, along with Golden Dewdrops and Brazil Cherry,
already regarded as invasive in Micronesia (Space 2001).
While it is appropriate to await formal assessment, other species not assessed may be
considered to belong to such a category. These include the introduced South
American tree, Schinus terebinthifolia. This species exhibited a considerable lag time
before an explosive invasion of South Florida (Ewel 1986:220). It is also ranked 84th
in the list of the worlds 100 worst invasive species (Fondation dEntreprise Total
2000:6). Already causing concern in and about Herberton, this bird-dispersed plant
may constitute a sleeper at least in parts of the Wet Tropics region.
Another regionally naturalised alien plant species are noted to be amongst the worlds
most serious invasive species (Fondation dEntreprise Total 2000). This is Hiptage
benghalensis. It is also listed by Space (2001) as invasive in Pacific Island
ecosystems. A watching brief is required to ensure that this species does not become
a major problem here.
Similarly, 326 species, some of which are native Wet Tropics plants, are listed (Space
2001) as invasive in ecosystems of the Pacific Islands (ie, Micronesia, American
Samoa or Niue). Inspection of this list reveals species that are in the process of
naturalising within the Wet Tropics that may also constitute sleeper weeds. These
include those previously noted, along with Andropogon gayanus, Anredera cordifolia,
Argyreia nervosa, Azadirachta indica, Bauhinia monandra, Bidens pilosa,
Brillantasia lamium, Buddleja madagascariensis, Caesalpinia decapetala, Canna
indica, Cardiospermum halicacabum, Cascabella thevetia, Castilla elastica,
Cenchrus ciliaris, C. echinatus, Centrosema pubescens, Cinnamomum camphora,
Clitoria terneata, Coccinia grandis, Coffea arabica, Cyperus rotundus, Digitaria
ciliaris, Echinochloa polystachya, Epipremnum aureum, Hedychium coronarium,
Hyparrhenia rufa, Hypochaeris radicata, Hyptis capitata, H. pectinata, H.
suaveolens, Jatropha gossypifolia, Macroptilium atropurpureum, Melinus repens,
Mimosa diplotricha, M. pudica, Momordica charantia, Montanoa hibiscifolia,
Muntingia calabura, Neonotonia wightii, Odontonema tubaeforme, Paspalum
conjugatum, P. dilitatum, P. paniculatum, P. urvillei, Passiflora edulis, P. foetida,
P. laurifolia, P. quadrangularis, P. suberosa, Pennisetum purpureum, Pinus
caribaea, Psidium cattleianum, Rubus alceifolius, Samanea saman, Sanchezia
parvibrachteata, Sanseviera trifasciata, Senna alata, Senna obtusifolia, Solanum
mauritianum, S. seaforthianum, S. torvum, Sorghum halapense, Stylosanthes
guianensis, Syngonium podophyllum, Thunbergia alata (together with other known
invasives belonging to this genus), Tradescantia spathacea, Triumphetta rhomboidea
and Urena lobata. This list also includes references to a host of known weeds in the
Wet Tropics and also to species such as Rhodomyrtus tomentosa and to others (eg,
Piper auritum) that are known to occur within the region (Waterhouse pers. comm.)
but which have not yet naturalised.
While the extent to which the plant has naturalised is limited and essentially confined
to highly disturbed situations, the extensive ornamental plantings of Bixa orellana
may, in time, prove problematic. This is so because the species is included by
Binggeli et al. (1998:29) on a provisional list of small (5-15m) invasive tropical trees.
Page 56
6.0
Consideration of Implications for Weed Management
While factors explicit to management priority ranking (such as feasibility and cost of
control) were not incorporated into the proposed Wet Tropics RAS, it was important
to consider the implications of the putative priorities derived from a review of weeds
present and a preliminary assessment of a 10%+ sample of those. Resources allocated
to the project did not permit the time-consuming assessment of all 504 naturalised
exotic species with a routine assessment estimated at 1-2 days per species (Pheloung
in press:119). Remaining taxa need to be ranked employing the RAS for a
comprehensive regional environmental weed risk assessment. It is only then that
management priorities can be effectively and comprehensively considered. In the
interim, there are some implications for management that do emerge. These are
discussed briefly below.
6.1
Prevention of Weed Entry
The foremost of these implications for management is the importance of ensuring that
potentially invasive plants are not imported for agricultural (particularly pastoral) and
ornamental purposes. Randall (pers. comm.) notes that the numbers of intentionally
introduced plants well outnumber any unintentional introductions, and that more
than 67% of all plant species that have naturalised in Australia over the last 25 or so
years were intentionally introduced for horticultural reasons. This commends as a
highest priority action for any country to put in place a basic system to control
deliberate species importations (Warren pers. comm.), and to strongly urge people
to include screening all new introductions for invasive potential (Randall pers.
comm.).
Despite advances in quarantine screening protocols, very aggressive weeds such as
Leucaena is, and, prior to its elevation to the list of WONS, Hymenachne was, being
actively promoted for pastoral use. Thus, government land management agencies
have provided conflicting advice regarding such plants on the one hand promoting
weed spread and on the other, advising the exclusion of such plants from permitted
import lists, and subsequently for containment and control of these pest species.
Devices such as Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) and properly constituted
quarantine exclusion systems are required to overcome the cost of control and myopia
(sensu Mooney & Drake 1989:504) practised to date facilitating such importations.
Considerable problems are also posed by the introduction of attractive ornamentals
such as Miconia. The Cairns City Council Pest Management Working Group is
currently aware of a range of other potentially problematic species introductions that
are undertaken for ornamental amenity reasons. These include Triplaris
?surinamensis, the eradication of which is accorded priority in the Citys PMP. Other
ornamentals such as Clerodendrum quadriloculare that are weedy in Micronesia
(Waterhouse pers. comm.) are currently cultivated in the Cairns area and may present
problems if they are permitted to escape.
To a lesser extent some potentially invasive alien species are cultivated and
distributed for food or medicinal properties. Apparently, the proliferation of Mikania
about the Bingil Bay area, and Sweet Prayer Plant (Thaumatococcus daniellii) are
cases in point (Luxton pers. comm.). Waterhouse (pers. comm.) has also noted the
availability of food plants such as Downy Rose Myrtle/Ceylon Hill Cherry
(Rhodomyrtus tomentosa) in nurseries from Rockhampton to Cairns. This plant is
highly problematic in Hawaii and Tahiti and may be another sleeper in this region.
Page 57
Other species that have proved to be invasive within the region such as Allamanda
cathartica, Duranta erecta and Sanchezia parvibracteata continue to be cultivated
and sold by nurseries. In order to combat such problems, a combination of
consultation with the nursery industry (and encouragement of self-regulation) and
sound contributions to wider public wider public awareness campaigns is required.
6.2
The Importance of Early Intervention
Of almost equal importance is instigating control programs where a weed is new, not
widespread and control is feasible (Carter 2000:92). It is vital, therefore, to identify
and control nascent foci (Goodland et al. 1998:12) or incipient invasions of sleeper
weeds ie, plants in initial stages of invasion before their rate of spread is
exponential (Groves 1999) (see Section 5.6).
A number of authors argue strongly for early intervention when incursions are
limited. Braithwaite & Timmins (1999) commend weed surveillance and early
detection to confine weed control to the least cost and that will involve minimal
impact on conservation values. Carter (1999:92) takes a diagrammatic approach to
demonstrate that control is feasible generally only in the early stages of invasion.
Groves (1999:634) demonstrates the cost efficiencies of eradicating new incursions.
Similarly, Panetta (1999:144) argues that, to be effective, weed control actions must
be triggered at low environmental weed densities. Loope (2000:61), in reviewing a
European book on plant invasions, is critical of the authors lack of appreciation of
the importance of rapid response to incipient invasions. The references to weedled control programs of Williams & White (2000:436) further confirm the value of
treatment in early phases of infestation. Earlier, MacDonald et al. (1989:243) warned
that successful control of weeds in nature reserves is uncommon unless control action
is instigated in the earliest phases of the invasion process.
It is instructive to consider management action directed towards species naturalising
in the region considered by Csurhes & Edwards (1998) to be potential (if not actual)
environmental weeds. Six taxa have been identified that are in the initial phase of
invasion and are considered, at this stage, to be amenable to eradication (Table 13).
Table 13: Taxa naturalised in the wet tropics, known to be major weeds elsewhere and
considered susceptible to eradication as they are in the initial phases of establishment (Groves
1999:635; species and assessment of probability of eradication extracted from Csurhes &
Edwards 1998:20-21)
SPECIES
FAMILY
Probability of
eradication
Ardisia humilis (note:

species in region may
be A. solanacea
pending taxonomic
clarification)
Brillantasia lamium
Chromolaena odorata
Myrsinaceae
medium
Acanthaceae
Asteraceae
low
low
Miconia calvescens
Melastomataceae
high
Mikania spp.
Thunbergia grandiflora
Asteraceae
Acanthaceae
high
low
CURRENT REGIONAL
DISTRIBUTION
invading from Cairns City residential

areas note that its congener A. elliptica
is considered to be one of the worlds
worst alien invasives ranking 9/100
(Fondation dEntreprise Total 2000:2)
infestations localised in Douglas Shire
infestations treated in Bingil Bay &
Tully-Murray districts
scattered individuals about Kuranda,
Babinda, Bramston Beach, Miriwinni
treated in Innisfail, Bramston Beach areas
long established infestations about
Mossman, Northern Beaches, Freshwater
Creek, Little Mulgrave, Babinda & along
many creeks south of the Mulgrave River
Page 58
The effective control of Panama Rubber (Castilla elastica) by the Cairns City
Councils Pest Management Unit and the Wet Tropics Tree Planting Scheme team is a
case in point. In 1998, incipient infestations of this tree that was originally imported
and maintained at the former Tropical Horticultural Collection of DPI at Kamerunga,
as a producer of a rubber substitute, were noted establishing under the closed canopies
of nearby riparian and adjacent rainforest. Although mainly confined to Kamerunga
Environment Park, the management of which is a joint Cairns City Council and
QPWS responsibility, and on private freehold land, some infestations were also
flourishing in the Barron Gorge National Park section of the World Heritage Area.
This species was afforded highest priority in the Councils Pest Management Plan and
infestations, including 25m tall mature trees, were treated. Currently, follow-up
control is being undertaken by the Pest Management Unit, including searches for
additional seedlings and ongoing monitoring of treated sites, to ensure no resurgence.
The prospects of eradicating this highly invasive alien species from the region are
now very good. This is due to the foresight of the Pest Management Working Group
and the diligence of the Pest Management Unit, the personnel of which understand
that weeds do not respect property lines and do not remain confined awaiting
cumbersome bureaucratic determinations, including resource allocations. They also
recognise that weed control must be timely, transcend tenure boundaries and that
effort will be wasted entirely if there is no follow-up activity.
Particular mention is warranted of the importance (and cost-effectiveness) of strategic
control of incipient infestations of serious weeds such as Miconia calvescens and
Mikania spp., especially in light of the treatment of incursions of Siam Weed, in the
Wet Tropics. This might be extended to several other species. Given its high-risk
rating, the current, relatively restricted distribution of Cucumber Tree suggests that it
is a species that should be targeted for priority control.
6.3
The Importance of Ecologically Integrated Weed Management
Control strategies also need to be ecologically integrated (Williams & West

2000:436) as well as coordinated amongst the various agencies. Those species that
are implicated in gross disturbance of ecosystem processes or those that are displacing
threatened communities and/or species must be targeted for priority control.
An understanding of landscape ecology also points to the fact that eradication and/or
containment control of a water-dispersed invader of riparian systems, must proceed
downstream from upstream sources to avoid reinvasion. There is also the recognition
that invasion/reinvasion proceeds rapidly on disturbed and/or unoccupied sites.
Therefore, it is likely that removal of exotic species infestations must be followed by
efforts to revegetate these sites using native species that are normally found growing
locally on such sites.
An ecological understanding of the resilience of invasive alien species, some of which
can reinvade from a persistent soil seed bank or from subterranean tubers and/or root
suckers, or simply from individuals that escaped initial treatment, as in the case of
Thunbergia grandiflora in Mulgrave River National Park and Harungana infestations
over a wider area, is vital. This requires that there is a commitment to judicious
monitoring, or surveillance, particularly of disturbed areas and along roads, other
utility corridors and streams that are avenues for weed invasion, and follow-up
treatment within a control program to optimise chances of success.
Page 59
Weed control frequently involves removal of target species together with site
disturbance. It has been demonstrated (see Section 2.1) that disturbance facilitates
further alien invasion. It is an ecological reality that reinvasion is more likely to occur
when sites are not occupied. Therefore, weed resurgence is less likely to occur where
sites have been replanted with native species and weed control may need to be
accompanied by revegetation efforts to ensure best results. In the Wet Tropics region,
this is likely to require inter-agency cooperation, for example, between DNR or
Council Pest Management Units and environmental repair teams such as those
operating within the Wet Tropics Tree Planting Scheme.
6.4
The Importance of Control or Containment of Existing Weed

Problems
Recognition of the serious risks posed by invasive alien species that have established
widespread populations within the area such that eradication is simply not feasible
requires that these be strategically controlled or contained. Control/containment is
primarily required at logistically critical locations in areas that have high conservation
value and/or that contain endandered REs or species. Control may involve local (as
against regional) eradication efforts or judicious containment of, for instance, Par
Grass or Pond Apple infestations adjacent to important wetland reserves.
It is argued that target species for highest priority control should be those rated using
the RAS with scores 50. Some 25 terrestrial taxa (or 30+ species) pose the most
serious environmental risk. These are set out in Table 14.
Table 14: Alien plant taxa adjudged to pose serious environmental risk in the Wet
Tropics region ranked according to risk score (habit codes as in Table 12)
Species
Family
Common name
Annona glabra
Annonaceae
Pond Apple
Habit
Score (%)
TT
90
Leucaena leucocephala
Mimosaceae
Leucaena
Tt
88
Chromolaena odorata
Asteraceae
Siam Weed
SS
82
Asteraceae
Singapore Daisy
82
Poaceae
Hymenachne
80
Miconia calvescens
Melastomataceae
Miconia
Tt
80
Psidium guajava
Myrtaceae
Guava
Tt
78
Thunbergia spp.
Acanthaceae
laurel vines
76
Mikania micrantha
Asteraceae
Mile-a-minute
74
Brachiaria mutica
Poaceae
Par Grass
74
Panicum maximum
Poaceae
Guinea Grass
72
Parmentiera aculeata
Bignoniaceae
Cucumber Tree
TT
70
Turbina corymbosa
Convolvulaceae
Turbine Vine
68
Ageratina riparia
Asteraceae
Mistflower
SS
64
Mangifera indica
Anacardiaceae
Mango
TT
64
Eupatorium catarium
Asteraceae
Praxelis
Ss
58
Andropogon gayanus
Poaceae
Gamba Grass
64
Bignoniaceae
African Tulip
TT
62
Asteraceae
Japanese Sunflower
SS
62
Solanum seaforthianum
Solanaceae
Brazilian Nightshade
60
Azadirachta indica
Meliaceae
Neem Tree
Tt
58
Clusiaceae
Harungana
TT
56
Stachytarpheta spp.
Verbenaceae
Snakeweeds
Ss
54
Senna obtusifolia
Caesalpiniaceae
Sicklepod
Ss
50
Syngonium podophyllum
Araceae
50
Page 60
6.5
Research Requirements
It is evident also that any effective weed management system must be founded on a
reliable information base. The necessary information is not always in existence,
particularly regarding weed species autecology and even the status of current
distributions of major weed species. To remedy this deficiency research is required in
particular areas. These include:
(i)
assessment of the potential environmental weed risk of those remaining exotic

naturalised plant species not already screened (448 species) employing the
newly devised Wet Tropics RAS;
(ii)
sensitivity testing of the relative risk ranking obtained using the RAS with the
view to its further refinement;
(iii)
identification of the determinants of and investigation of the autecology of

likely sleeper weeds;
(iv)
mapping of the distribution of infestations of major weed species with the

view to instigating strategic control actions;
(v)
development of best practice, integrated and coordinated weed control that

takes regard of risks to significant native communities and species; and
(vi)
investigation of biological control prospects to deal with the highest priority

environmental weeds currently and for other invasive species that have no or
few closely related native species.
Page 61
7.0
Conclusions and Recommendations
Loope (2000:61) reiterates the frequent warning that given time and resistance to
management, invasive plants will undoubtedly contribute to the biological
impoverishment of continents, especially in the areas of significant local endemism,
as is the case in the case of the Wet Tropics Bioregion of north-eastern Queensland.
Therefore, this is not only a serious threat, but also one that cannot be ignored by
authorities, as it will lead to the breaching of Australias international obligations as a
signatory nation to the World Heritage Convention.
The problem of alien invasive species within the context of the Wet Tropics
Bioregion (in particular, management of the World Heritage Area) was considered.
This drew upon an understanding that alien species invasions especially of
environmental weeds - constitute perhaps the second most serious threat to the
survival and integrity of natural systems worldwide. Central also to considerations
was the high conservation significance ascribed to much of the areas vegetation, flora
and fauna and a particular susceptibility of tropical systems and to communities, that
by virtue of their inherent nature, or due to disruption and forest fragmentation, had
become quasi-insular (MacDonald et al.1989:246) in character, rendering them even
more invasion-prone.
An official list of regionally naturalised species obtained from the Queensland
Herbarium was refined to aggregate infraspecific taxa (ie, subspecies/varieties) into a
single taxon, accommodate taxonomic nomenclatural changes and to incorporate at
least 29 species not recorded as naturalised in the collection. These included some of
the regions actually or potentially problematic environmental weeds such as Mikania
micrantha, Schinus terebinthifolia, Hymenachne amplexicaulis, Azadirachta indica
and Pinus caribaea. It is estimated that over 500 exotic species including several
interspecific hybrids have become naturalised in the Wet Tropics Bioregion.
Existing RASs, including some currently being developed, were reviewed and the
most appropriate properties incorporated into a RAS designed explicitly to consider
alien environmental weed risks to the Wet Tropics Bioregion. The RAS specifically
designed to take into account weeds documented for tropical areas, inherent
invasiveness and significance of systems at risk, was proposed and the rationale
underpinning its formulation clarified. Components assessed include gross
invasiveness (ecesis/establishment in native vegetation, to what extent a species is
advantaged by disturbance), a range of intrinsic (biological) attributes predisposing
species to invasiveness (ie, reproductive capacity/mode; dispersal capacity;
competitive ability and ecesis needs) and extrinsic (host environment) factors
(important in the context of World Heritage Area management and regional
ecosystems/species at risk). The latter constitutes the basis for asset-based
management systems that are employed in other states such as Tasmania (Hall 1999)
and South Australia (Virtue 2000) and elsewhere (eg, Hiebert & Stubbendieck 1993).
Incidentally, the Tasmanian system is based on the Exotic Plant Ranking System of
Hiebert & Stubbendieck (1993). Control feasibility, that is frequently incorporated as
a basic element of weed risk assessment systems, was considered secondary from risk
assessment per se. Accordingly, it was treated separately in subsequent management
considerations.
Page 62
This RAS was tested on all seven exotic aquatic species naturalised within the
bioregion and 50 species of terrestrial weeds drawn from a list of 25 derived from
local government Pest Management Plans by DNR (Bebawi, pers. comm.) and
supplemented by 25 other species representative of a range of different weed groups.
Screening of this sample using the new RAS provided plausible results. Notably, the
known worst weeds (eg, Pond Apple and Hymenachne - both WONS together with
Siam Weed, Miconia, Singapore Daisy, Guava, Thunbergia vines and Mikania, that
are known as particularly invasive in other tropical settings) ranked very highly.
Leucaena also ranked the second highest environmental weed risk regionally. It,
along with other deliberately introduced stock forage species such as Par Grass,
Guinea Grass and Gamba Grass, together with pasture legumes, present serious
environmental problems for natural area management. It is argued that urgent
provisions should be made by government and associated pastoral support agencies to
preclude further releases of potentially serious weeds by ensuring observance of the
precautionary principle (see Rozefelds & Mackenzie 1999:583). Therefore, action to
prevent further and continued introduction of highly invasive but considered useful
plants to the region is sorely needed.
Other pertinent management issues are also addressed. These include the urgent need
for a rapid control response to incipient environmental weed incursions, identification
and treatment of sleeper weeds and ecologically integrated control efforts to
instigate containment and reduction of infestations of the worst weeds, especially
those that threaten endangered communities and species. It was also argued that
research is urgently required in some areas and that such research must be regarded as
an intrinsic component of weed management.
Recommendations for further research include peer review and sensitivity testing of
the Wet Tropics RAS and the procurement of additional biological/ecological
information on the 448 naturalised exotics remaining and their assessment using the
RAS. It was also recommended that research also include mapping of infestations
(especially of high scoring weeds with comparatively limited distributions)
throughout the region to assist management deliberations. Lastly, the formulation of a
secondary screening system to explicitly take into account feasibility, costs and
strategic matters associated with weed control and eradication is required urgently if
the serious problem of invasive alien plants is to be addressed effectively within this
and other regions.
Acknowledgments
Special appreciation is extended to Barbara Waterhouse (of AQIS), Des Boorman (of the Nurserymans
Association), Anton vanderSchaan (of SitePlan), Rigel Jensen (of JCU), Andrew Small (of GHD) and to Eric
Higgins (of the Wet Tropics Tree-Planting Scheme, Cardwell Shire) for extremely valuable explicit comments on
exotic species that have naturalised in the region. I am indebted also to Faiz Bebawi, Peter James, Alice Beilby
and Rebecca Hosking of DNR (Land Protection) for facilitating access to some material and to Rachel McFadyen,
Dane Panetta and Vic Little (also of DNR) for their support and useful comments. Gordon Guymer, Peter
Bostock, Bill McDonald and George Batianoff (Queensland Herbarium) were most helpful in providing access to
plant records and for clarifying the taxonomic status of some problematic species. Access to the alien species
Internet chat line - http://indaba.iucn.org/archives/aliens-1/wwwmsgs/ - which is a most useful information source
permitting valuable exchanges with people such as Rod Randall, a Weed Profiler of the Department of
Agriculture, WA, and Paula Warren of the Department of Conservation, NZ - is also gratefully acknowledged.
Page 63
Bibliography
Adair, R. J. & Groves, R. H. (1997) Impact of Environmental Weeds on Biodiversity:
A Review and Development of a Methodology. Report to Environment
Australias Invasive Species Program. Environment Australia, Canberra:
36pp..
Arthington, A. H., Kailola, P. J., Woodland, D. J. & Zalucki, J. M. (1999) Baseline
Environmental Data Relevant to an Evaluation of Quarantine Risk
Potentially Associated with the Importation to Australia of Ornamental
Finfish. Report to the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service,
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra.
Ashton, P. J. & Mitchell, D. S. (1989) Aquatic plants: patterns and modes of invasion,
attributes of invading species and assessment of control programmes. (in)
Drake, J. A., Mooney, H. A., di Castri, F., Groves, R. H., Kruger, F. J.,
Rejmnek, M. & Williamson, M. (eds) Biological Invasions: A Global
Perspective. Scope 37/John Wiley & Sons, New York:111-154.
Baker, H. G. (1986) Patterns of plant invasion in North America (in) Mooney, H. A.
& Drake, J. A. (eds) Ecology of Biological Invasions of North America and
Hawaii. Ecological Studies: Analysis and Synthesis Violume 58, SpringerVerlag, New York:44-57.
Bass, D. A. (in press) Invasiveness: rate of spread, population growth and seed
dispersal ecology. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft Proceedings: 1st International
Workshop on Weed Risk Assessment. CSIRO, Adelaide:64-70.
Batianoff, G. N & Franks, A. J. (1998) Weed invasion of the tropical Mackay coast,
Queensland, Australia. Plant Protection Quarterly 13(3):123-130.
Bazzaz, F. A. (1986) Life history of colonizing plants: some demographic, genetic
and physiological features (in) Mooney, H. A. & Drake, J. A. (eds) Ecology
of Biological Invasions of North America and Hawaii. Ecological Studies:
Analysis and Synthesis Volume 58, Springer-Verlag, New York:96-110.
Beard, J. S. (1995) South-west botanical province Western Australia, Australia. (in)
Davies, S. D., Heywood, V. H. & Hamilton, A. C. (eds) World Centres of
Plant Diversity Volume 2. WWF/IUCN, Oxford Information Press:484-489.
Binggeli, P., Hall, J. B. & Healey, R. (1998) An overview of invasive woody plants in
the tropics. School of Agriculture and Forest Science, University of Wales,
Bangor Publication No. 13: 83pp.
Bowman, D. M. J. S. (2000) Australian Rainforests: Islands of Green in a Land of
Fire. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge:345pp..
Page 64
Braithwaite, H. & Timmins, S. M. (1999) Weed surveillance catching em early.

(in) Bishop, A. C., Boersma, M. & Barnes, C. D. (eds) Proceedings of the 12th
Australian Weed Conference, Tasmanian Weed Society Inc., Hobart:47-50.
Braithwaite, H. & Timmins, S. (in press) Weed surveillance how to do it? (in)
Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft Proceedings: 1st International Workshop on Weed
Risk Assessment. CSIRO, Adelaide:111-113.
Bunn, S. E., Davies, P. M., Kellaway, D. M. & Prosser, I. P. (1998) Influence of
invasive macrophytes on channel morphology and hydrology in an open
tropical lowland stream, and potential control by riparian shading.
Freshwater Biology 39:171-178.
Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations (1989) Weeds in Australian Cane Fields Part
A: A Guide to the Identification of Weeds. BSES Bulletin - Special Edition
28:1-84.
Callaway, R. M. & Aschehoug, E. T. (2000) Invasive plants versus their new and old
neighbors: A mechanism for exotic invasion. Science 290 (5491):521-523.
Carter, R. J. (2000) Principles of regional weed management, legislation and
quarantine. (in) Richardson, R. G. & Richardson, F. J. (eds) Australian Weed
Management Systems. CRC for Weeds Management Systems/R.G. & F.J.
Richardson, Meredith:83-104.
Champion, P. D. & Clayton, J. S. (in press) A weed risk assessment model for aquatic
weeds in New Zealand. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft Proceedings: 1st
International Workshop on Weed Risk Assessment. CSIRO, Adelaide:168196.
Collingham, Y. C., Wadsworth, R. A., Huntley, B. & Hulme, P. E. (2000) Predicting
the spatial distribution of non-indigenous riparian weeds: issues of spatial
scale and extent. Journal of Applied Ecology 37(suppl. 1):13-27.
Cronk, C. B. & Fuller, J. L. (1995) Plant Invaders: The Threat to Natural Ecosystems.
Chapman Hall, London:241pp..
Csurhes, S. & Edwards, R. (1998) National Weeds Program: Potential Environmental
Weeds in Australia Candidate Species for Preventative Control. National
Parks and Wildlife Biodiversity Group, Environment Australia,
Canberra:208pp..
Daehler, C. C. & Strong, D. R. (1993) Prediction and biological invasions. Trends in
Ecology and Evolution 8(10):380.
Page 65
DAntonio, C. M, Tunison, T. J. & Loh, R. K. (2000) Variation in the impact of

exotic grasses on native plant composition in relation to fire across an
elevation gradient in Hawaii. Austral Ecology 25:507-522.
Davis, M. A., Grime, P. & Thompson, K. (2000) Fluctuating resources in plant
communities: a general theory of invasibility. Journal of Ecology 88:528534.
Dcamps, H., Fortun, M., Gazelle, F. & Pautou, G. (1988) Historical influence of
man on the riparian dynamics of a fluvial landscape. Landscape Ecology
1:163-173.
Dcamps, H., Planty-Tabacchi, A. M. & Tabacchi, E. (1995) Changes in the
hydrological regime and invasions by plant species along riparian systems of
the Adour River, France. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 11:2333.
Elton, C. S. (1958) The Ecology of Invasion by Animals and Plants. Methuen,
London:181pp..
Ewell, J. J. Invasibility: lessons from south Florida (in) Mooney, H. A. & Drake, J. A.
(eds) Ecology of Biological Invasions of North America and Hawaii.
Ecological Studies: Analysis and Synthesis Violume 58, Springer-Verlag,
New York:214-230.
FAO (1996) International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures: Guidelines for Pest
Risk Analysis. Publication No. 2, Secretariat of the International Plant
Protection Convention, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations, Rome:18pp.
FAO (1998a) International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures: Determination of
Pest Status of an Area. Publication No. 8, Secretariat of the International
Plant Protection Convention, Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations, Rome:17pp..
FAO (1998b) International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures: Guidelines for
Pest Eradication Programmes. Publication No. 9, Secretariat of the
International Plant Protection Convention, Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations, Rome:14pp..
FAO (1999) International Plant Protection Convention: International Standards for
Pytosanitory Measures Draft Standard PRA for Quarantine Pests.
Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention, Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome:17pp.
Page 66
Fondation dEntreprise Total (2000) Global Invasive Species Database: 100 of the
Worlds Worst Weeds.
http://www.issg.org/database/species.html
Fowler, S. V., Syrett, P. & Hill, R. L. (2000) Success and safety in the biological
control of environmental weeds in New Zealand. Austral Ecology 25:553562.
Goodland, T. C. R., Healy, J. R. & Binggeli, P. (1998) Control and management of
invasive alien woody plants in the tropics. School of Agriculture and Forest
Science, University of Wales, Bangor Publication No. 14: 37pp.
http://www.bangor.ac.uk/~afs101/iwpt/alienspecies.html
Goodwin, B. J., McAllister, A. J. & Fahrig, L. 1999) Predicting invasiveness of plant
species based on biological information. Conservation Biology 13:422-426.
Goosem, S. (1993) Compilation of a list of "undesirable" plant species to be prohibited
from cultivation within the Wet Tropics WHA. Restricted Internal
Memorandum, WTMA, Cairns.
Goosem, S., Morgan, G. & Kemp, J. E. (1999) Chapter 7: Wet Tropics (in) Sattler, P. S.
& Williams, R. D. (eds) The Conservation Status of Queenslands Bioregional
Ecosystems. Environmental Protection Agency, Brisbane:7/1-7/74.
Grime, J. P. (1977) Evidence for the existence of three primary strategies in plants and
its relevance to ecological and evolutionary theory. The American Naturalist
111(982):1169-1194.
Groves, R. H. (1991) Weed control in conservation reserves and amenity areas of
Australia. Kowari 2: Part 2:137-141.
Groves, R. H. (1999) Sleeper Weeds. (in) Bishop, A. C., Boersma, M. & Barnes, C. D.
(eds) Proceedings of the 12th Australian Weed Conference, Tasmanian Weed
Society Inc., Hobart:632-636.
Hall, R. (1999) Strategic weed management: the way forward. (in) Bishop, A. C.,
Boersma, M. & Barnes, C. D. (eds) Proceedings of the 12th Australian Weed
Conference, Tasmanian Weed Society Inc., Hobart:82-85.
Heywood, V. H. (1989) Patterns, extents and modes of invasions by terrestrial plants.
(in) Drake, J. A., Mooney, H. A., di Castri, F., Groves, R. H., Kruger, F. J.,
Hazard, W. H. L. (1988). Introducing crop, pasture and ornamental species into
Australia - the risk of introducing new weeds. Australian Plant Introduction
Review 19, 19-36.
Page 67
Hiebert, R. R. & Stubbendieck, J. (1993) Handbook for Ranking Exotic Plants for
Management and Control. Natural Resources Report, United States
Department of the Interior, National Parks Service, Midwest Regional Office
Denver:26pp..
Higgins, S. I., Richardson, D. M., Cowling, R. M. & Trinder-Smith, T. H. (1999)
Predicting the landscape-scale distribution of alien plants and their threat to
plant diversity. Conservation Biology 13:303-313.
Hobbs, R. J. (1989) The nature and effects of disturbance relative to invasions. (in)
Drake, J. A., Mooney, H. A., di Castri, F., Groves, R. H., Kruger, F. J.,
Humphries, S. E., Groves, R. H. & Mitchell, D. S. (1991) Plant Invasions of Australian
Ecosystems: A Status Review and Management Directions. Kowari 2: Part
1:1-134.
Humphries, S. E. & Stanton, J. P. (1992) Weed Assessment in the Wet Tropics World
Heritage Area of North Queensland. Report to the Wet Tropics Management
Agency, Cairns:75pp. + plates.
Jensen, M. N. (2000) Plant invader may use chemical weapons. Science 290 (5491):
421-422.
Keighery, G. (1999) Predicting and preventing the wests environmental weeds of the
next century. (in) Bishop, A. C., Boersma, M. & Barnes, C. D. (eds)
Proceedings of the 12th Australian Weed Conference, Tasmanian Weed
Society Inc., Hobart:572-575.
King, F. W. (1987) Thirteen milestones on the road to extinction. (in) Fitter, R. & Fitter.
M. (eds) The Road to Extinction. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland:7-18.
Kotanen, P. M., Bergelson, J. & Hazlett, D. L. (1998) Habitats of native and exotic
plants in Colorado shortgrass steppe: a comparative approach. Canadian
Journal of Botany 76(4):664-672.
Kriticos, D. J. & Randall, R. P. (in press) A comparison of systems to analyses potential
weeds distributions. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft Proceedings: 1 s t
International Workshop on Weed Risk Assessment. CSIRO, Adelaide:94-109.
Lavorel, S., Prieur-Richard, A. H. & Grigulis, K. (1999) Invasibility and diversity of
plant communities: from patterns to processes. Diversity and Distributions
5:41-49.
Lazarides, M., Cowley, K. & Hohnen, P. (1997) CSIRO Handbook of Australian
Weeds. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood:264pp..
Page 68
Lehtonen, P. P. (in press) Weed initiated pest risk assessment in the United States:
Guidelines for qualitative assessments. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft
Proceedings: 1st International Workshop on Weed Risk Assessment. CSIRO,
Adelaide:133-139.
Levin, S. A. (1989)Analysis of risks for invasions and control programs. (in) Drake, J.
A., Mooney, H. A., di Castri, F., Groves, R. H., Kruger, F. J., Rejmnek, M. &
Williamson, M. (eds) Biological Invasions: A Global Perspective. Scope
37/John Wiley & Sons, New York:425-436.
Lodge, D. M. (1993a) Biological invasions: lessons for ecology. Trends in Ecology
and Evolution 8(4):133-137.
Lodge, D. M. (1993b) Reply from David Lodge. Trends in Ecology and Evolution
8(10):380-381.
Lonsdale, W. M. & Smith, C. S. (in press) Evaluating pest screening procedures
insights from epidemiology and ecology. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft
Adelaide:156-164.
Loope, L. (2000) Book Review: A passive approach to biological invasions. Diversity
and Distributions 6:61-62.
Lvei, G. L. (1997) Global change through invasion. Nature 388:627.
Low, T. (1999) Feral Future. Viking Books, Australia:380pp..
Macdonald, I. A. W., Loope, L. L., Usher, M. B. & Hamann, O. (1989) Wildlife
conservation and the invasion of nature reserves by introduced species: a
global perspective. (in) Drake, J. A., Mooney, H. A., di Castri, F., Groves, R.
H., Kruger, F. J., Rejmnek, M. & Williamson, M. (eds) Biological Invasions:
A Global Perspective. Scope 37/John Wiley & Sons, New York:215-256.
Maillet, J. & Lopez-Garcia, C. (2000) What criteria are relevant for predicting the
invasive capacity of a new agricultural weed? The case of invasive American
species in France. Weed Research 40:11-26.
Markin, G. P. (1989) Alien plant management by biological control. (in) Stone, C. P.
& Stone, D. B. (eds) Conservation Biology in Hawaii. University of Hawaii
Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit, Honolulu:70-73.
McFadyen, R. (2000) Impacts of exotic weeds on wildlife. Paper presented to the
Royal Society of Queenslands Landscape Health in Queensland
Symposium, Indooroopilly, November 17.
Page 69
Mooney, H. A. & Drake, J. A. (1989) Biological invasions: a SCOPE Program

overview. (in) Drake, J. A., Mooney, H. A., di Castri, F., Groves, R. H.,
Kruger, F. J., Rejmnek, M. & Williamson, M. (eds) Biological Invasions: A
Global Perspective. Scope 37/John Wiley & Sons, New York:491-508.
Morat, P, Jaffr, T, Veillon, J. M. & MacKee, H. S. (1986) Affinits floristiques et
considrations sur lorigine des maquis miniers de la Nouvelle-Caldonie.
Adansonia 2:133-182.
Mulvaney, M. (in press) The effect of introduction pressure on the naturalisation of
ornamental woody plants in south-eastern Australia. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.)
Draft Proceedings: 1st International Workshop on Weed Risk Assessment.
CSIRO, Adelaide:71-78.
Naiman, R. J. & Dcamps, H. (1997) The ecology of interfaces: Riparian zones.
Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 28:621-658.
Noble, I. R. (1989) Attributes of invaders and the invading process: terrestrial and
vascular plants. (in) Drake, J. A., Mooney, H. A., di Castri, F., Groves, R. H.,
Kruger, F. J., Rejmnek, M. & Williamson, M. (eds) Biological Invasions: A
Global Perspective. Scope 37/John Wiley & Sons, New York:301-314.
NZDC (1997) Ecological Weeds Database. Unpublished Database, New Zealand
Department of Conservation, Wellington.
Ogle, C. C., La Cock, G. D., Arnold, G. & Mickelson, N. (2000) Impact of an exotic
vine Clematis vitalba (F. Ranunculaceae) and of control measures on plant
biodiversity in indigenous forest, Taihape, New Zealand. Austral Ecology
25:539-551.
Orians, G.H. (1986) Site characteristics favouring invasions (in) Mooney, H. A. &
Drake, J. A. (eds) Ecology of Biological Invasions of North America and
Hawaii. Ecological Studies: Analysis and Synthesis Violume 58, SpringerVerlag, New York:133-148.
Panetta, F. D. (1993). A system of assessing proposed plant introductions for weed
potential. Plant Protection Quarterly 8, 10-4.
Panetta, F. D. (1999) Can we afford to delay action against weeds in valued natural
areas? (in) Bishop, A. C., Boersma, M. & Barnes, C. D. (eds) Proceedings of
the 12th Australian Weed Conference, Tasmanian Weed Society Inc., Hobart:
144-148.
Parendes, L. A. & Jones, J. A. (2000) Role of light availability and dispersal in exotic
plant invasion along roads and streams in the H. J. Andrews Experimental
Forest, Oregon. Conservation Biology 14(1):64-75.
Page 70
Pattison, R. R., Goldstein, G. & Area, A. (1998) Growth, biomass allocation and
photsynthesis of invasive and native Hawaiian rainforest species. Oecologica
117(4):449-458.
Pemberton, R. W. (2000) Predictable risk to native plants in weed biological control.
Oecologia 125(4):489-494.
Pheloung, P. C. (1995) Determining the weed potential of new plant introductions to
Australia. Attachment B. A report on the development of a Weed Risk
Assessment System commissioned by the Australian Weeds Committee and
the Plant Industries Committee, Agricultural Protection Board of Western
Australia, Perth:34pp. + apps.
Pheloung, P. C. (in press) Weed risk assessment for plant introductions: a.
Development. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft Proceedings: 1st International
Pulliam, H. R. (2000) On the relationship between niche and distribution. Ecology
Letters 3:349-361.
Py_ek, P. (1998) Is there a taxonomic pattern to plant invasions? Oikos 82:282-294.
Py_ek, P. & Prach, K. (1993) Plant invasions and the role of riparian habitats: a
comparison of four species alien to central Europe. Journal of Biogeography
20:413-420.
Queensland Government (1998) Wet Tropics Management Plan, Subordinate
Legislation No. 161 of the Wet Tropics World Heritage Protection and
Management Act (1993), GoPrint, Brisbane.
Radford, I. J. & Cousens, R. D. (2000) Invasiveness and comparative life-history
traits of exotic and indigenous Senecio species in Australia. Oecologia
125(4):531-542.
Randall, J. M., Benton, N. & Morse, L. E. (in press) Categorizing invasive weeds: the
challenge of rating pests we already have. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft
Adelaide:197-212.
Reichard, S. (in press) The search for patterns that make invasion possible. (in)
Rejmnek, M. (1989) Invasibility of plant communities. (in) Drake, J. A., Mooney, H.
A., di Castri, F., Groves, R. H., Kruger, F. J., Rejmnek, M. & Williamson, M.
(eds) Biological Invasions: A Global Perspective. Scope 37/John Wiley &
Sons, New York:369-388.
Page 71
Rejmnek, M. (2000) Invasive plants: approaches and predictions, Austral Ecology

25:497-506.
Rejmnek, M. (in press) What tools do we have for the detection of invasive plant
species? (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft Proceedings: 1st International
Rejmnek, M. & Richardson, D. M. (1996) What attributes make some plant species
more invasive? Ecology 77:1655-1661.
Richardson, D. M. (1998) Forestry trees as invasive aliens. Conservation Biology
12(1):18-26.
Richardson, D. M., Py_ek, P., Rejmnek, M., Barbour, M. G., Panetta, D.& West, C.J.
(2000) Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: concepts and definitions.
Diversity and Distributions 6:93-107.
Ridenour, W. M. & Callaway, R. M. (2001) The relative importance of allelopathy in
interference: the effects of an invasive weed on a native bunchgrass.
Oecolgia 126(3):444-450.
Rozefelds, A. C. & Mackenzie, R. (1999) The weed invasion in Tasmania in the
1870s: knowing the past to predict the future. (in) Bishop, A. C., Boersma, M. &
Barnes, C. D. (eds) Proceedings of the 12th Australian Weed Conference,
Tasmanian Weed Society Inc., Hobart:581-583.
Russell, J. D. J., Hales, P. W. & Helmke, S. A. (1996) Stream Habitat and Fish
Resources in the Russell and Mulgrave Rivers Catchment. Information Series
QI96008, Department of Primary Industries Northern Fisheries Centre,
Cairns:52pp..
Sax, D. F. & Brown, J. H. (2000) The paradox of invasion. Global Ecology and
Biogeography 9:363-371.
Smith, C.W. (1989) Non-native plants. (in) Stone, C. P. & Stone, D. B. (eds)
Conservation Biology in Hawaii. University of Hawaii Cooperative
National Park Resources Studies Unit, Honolulu:60-69.
Sousa, W. P. (1984) The role of disturbance in natural communities. Annual Review
of Ecology and Systematics 15:353-391.
Space, J. (2001) PIER (Pacific Island Ecosystem at Risk Project). USDA Forest
Service, US Geological Survey, HEAR, Albany. website
http://www.hear.org/pier/index.html
Page 72
SSC Invasive Species Group (2000) IUCN Guidelines for the Prevention of
Biodiversity Loss Caused by Alien Invasive Species. IUCN Council, Gland
Switzerland:17pp..
State of the Environment Advisory Council (1996) Australia State of the Environment
Report website: http://www.environment.gov.au/soe/soe96/soe96.html
Steinke, E. & Walton, C. (1999) Weed risk assessment of plant imports to Australia:
policy and process. Australian Journal of Environmental Management
6(3):157-163.
Swarbrick, J. T. (1993a) The Biology, Distribution, Impact and Control of Five Weeds
of the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area. Report to the Wet Tropics
Management Agency, Cairns:142pp..
Swarbrick, J. T. (1993b) The Chemical Control of Pond Apple, Harungana,
Sanchezia, Turbina and Coffee. Report to the Wet Tropics Management
Agency, Cairns:40pp..
Swarbrick, J. T. (1993c) Third Report on the Chemical Control of Pond Apple,
Harungana, Turbina and Coffee. Report to the Wet Tropics Management
Agency, Cairns:22pp..
Swarbrick, J. T. (1993d) The Commercial Uses of Pond Apple (Annona glabra) and
Their Implications for its Declaration in Queensland. Note for the Wet
Tropics Management Agency, Cairns:7pp..
Swarbrick, J. T. & Skarratt, D. B. (1994) The Ecological Requirements and Potential
Australian Distribution of Pond Apple (Annona glabra). Report to the Wet
Tropics Management Agency, Cairns:12pp..
Teytaud, R. (1998) Prototype tools for risk assessment of alien plant invasions in
Hawaii: A Report of the Hawaii Ecosystems at Risk (HEAR) Project. HEAR,
Hawaii. http://www.hear.org/climatemodel
Thomas, P. A. (in press) Weed risk assessment and prevention in Hawaii: status and
practicalities. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft Proceedings: 1st International
Thorp, J. R. (1999) Weeds of National Significance: Guidelines for Developing Weed
Strategies. National Weeds Strategy Executive Committee, Launceston:
14pp..
Timmins, S. M. & Owen, S.J. (in press) Scary species, superlative sites: assessing
weed risk in New Zealands protected natural areas. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.)
CSIRO, Adelaide:234-246.
Page 73
Tracey, J. G. (1982) The Vegetation of the Humid Tropical Region of North

Queensland. CSIRO, Melbourne:124 pp..
Tye, A. (in press) Invasive plant problems and requirements for weed risk assessment
in the Galapagos Islands. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft Proceedings: 1st
Virtue, J. G. (2000) Weed Assessment Guide 2000. Animal and Plant Control
Commission South Australia, Adelaide:12pp..
Virtue, J. G. (ed.) (in press) Draft Proceedings: 1st International Workshop on Weed
Risk Assessment. CSIRO, Adelaide:246pp..
Virtue, J. G., Groves, R. H. & Panetta, F. D. (in press) Towards a system to determine
national significance of weeds in Australia. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft
Adelaide:165-187.
Virtue, J., Panetta, D., Randall, J. & Parnell, T. (in press) Discussion paper:
International workshop on weed risk assessment for quarantine and
coordinated control. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft Proceedings: 1st
Vitousek, P. M. (1986) Biological invasion and ecosystem properties: can species
make a difference? (in) Mooney, H. A. & Drake, J. A. (eds) Ecology of
Biological Invasions of North America and Hawaii. Ecological Studies:
Analysis and Synthesis Violume 58, Springer-Verlag, New York:163-176.
Wadsworth, R. A., Collingham, Y. C., Willis, S. G., Huntley, B. & Hulme, P. E.
(2000) Simulating the spread and management of alien riprian weeds: are
they out of control? Journal of Applied Ecology 37(suppl. 1):28-38.
Wainger, L. A. & King, D. A. (in press) Prioritizing weed risks: using landscape
context as a basis for indicators of functions, services and values. (in) Virtue,
J. G. (ed.) Draft Proceedings: 1st International Workshop on Weed Risk
Assessment. CSIRO, Adelaide:213-233.
Wallmer, M. E. (1994) Fuel loads of the grass species Panicum maximum, Themeda
triandra, Melinus minutiflora and Imperata cylindrica var. major: a
preliminary investigation into the effect of age on the fuel loads of grass
species occurring on the fire degraded hillslopes of Cairns. Report prepared
for completion of the degree of B. App. Sc. (Natural Systems and Wildlife
Management), UofQ (Gatton College):40pp. + apps.
Walton, C. S. Weed risk assessment for plant introductions: B. Implementation of a
permitted list approach. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.) Draft Proceedings: 1st
International Workshop on Weed Risk Assessment. CSIRO, Adelaide:125132.
Page 74
Waterhouse, B. M. & Mitchell, A. A. (1998) Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy

Weeds Target List. AQIS Miscellaneous Publication No. 6/98:110pp..
Webb, L. J. (1958) Cyclones as an ecological factor in tropical lowland rainforest,
North Queensland. Australian Journal of Botany 6:220-228.
Webb, L. J. & Tracey, J.G (1981) Australian Rainforests: patterns and change (in)
Keast, A. (ed.) Ecological Biogeography of Australia. W. Junk, The
Hague:607-694.
Werren, G. L. (1998) Ecological Assessment of Vegetation on the Cardwell
Esplanade and Consideration of Management Intent. Consultants Report to
Cardwell Shire Council, Tully:22pp..
Werren, G. L. (2000) Observations of weed infestations in the Speewah-KurandaLake Southedge area from aerial inspection by helicopter. ACTFR Report
No. 00/11, Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research, JCU,
Townsville:8pp..
Werren, G. L. & King, D. (1991) Conservation and management. (in) Nix, H. A. &
Switzer, M. A. (eds) Kowari I - Rainforest Animals: Atlas of Vertebrates
Endemic to Australia's Wet Tropics. Australian National Parks and Wildlife
Service, Canberra:41-42.
Werren, G. L., Goosem, S., Tracey, J. G. & Stanton, J. P. (1995) The Australian wet
tropics centre of plant diversity. (in) Davies, S. D., Heywood, V. H. &
Hamilton, A. C. (eds) World Centres of Plant Diversity Volume 2.
WWF/IUCN, Oxford Information Press:500-506.
Werren, G. L. & King, D. A. (1991) Conservation and management. (in) Nix, H. &
Switzer, M. (eds) Rainforest Animals: An Atlas of Wet Tropics Endemic
Vertebrates. Kowari 1:41-42
Willliams, J. A. & West, C. J. (2000) Environmental weeds in Australia and New
Zealand: issues and approaches to management. Austral Ecology 25:425-444.
Williams, P. A., Nicol, E. & Newfield, M. (in press) Assessing the risk to indigenous
biota of new exotic plant taxa not yet in New Zealand. (in) Virtue, J. G. (ed.)
CSIRO, Adelaide:141:155.
Williams, S. E., Pearson, R. G. & Walsh, P. J. (1996) Distributions and biodiversity
of the terrestrial vertebrates of Australias wet tropics: a review of current
knowledge. Pacific Conservation Biology 2:327-362.
Page 75
Williamson, M. (in press) Can the impacts of invasive species be predicted? (in)
Willis, A. J., Memmott, J. & Forrester, R. I. (2000) Is there evidence for the postinvasion evolution of increased size among invasive plant species? Ecology
Letters 3:275-283.
WTMA (1995) Draft Wet Tropics Plan: Protection Through Partnerships. Wet
Tropics Management Authority, Cairns: 180pp. + maps.
WTMA (1999) Wet Tropics Management Authority Annual Report 1998-99. Wet
Tropics Management Authority, Cairns:42pp..
WTMA (2000) Wet Tropics Management Authority Annual Report 1999-00. Wet
Tropics Management Authority, Cairns:40pp..
Yamashita, N., Ishida, A., Kushima, H. & Tanaka, N. (2000) Acclimation to sudden
increase in light favoring an invasive over native trees in subtropical islands,
Japan. Oecologia 125(3):412-419.
Page 76
Appendix 1 Project Specifics

Proponent
Cooperative Research Centre for Tropical Rainforest Ecology and Management
PO Box 6811
Cairns, QLD. 4870
Ph: 40 42-1246
Fax: 40 42-1247
Email: Nigel.Stork@jcu.edu.au
CONTACT OFFICER
Mr Garry Werren
Australian Centre for Tropical Freshwater Research
At Rainforest CRC,
James Cook University,
Cairns Campus, McGregor Rd,
PO 6811 Cairns
Tel. 0740421254
Fax. 0740421247
PROJECT TITLE
Environmental Weeds of the Wet Tropics: Risk Assessment and Prioritisation
Background
Environmental weeds are introduced species (including translocated native species)
capable of establishing self-sustaining populations by invading natural ecosystems.
Such plants are generally perennial species capable of displacing vegetation strata
and/or are capable of inducing overt modifications to the function of the system by
changing, for example, light, fire or hydrological regimes. Environmental weeds
therefore, are potentially capable of causing large-scale pervasive modifications to
natural processes and ecosystems and are considered to be major threats to locally
restricted endemic plant and animal species and communities modifying patterns of
species richness, abundance or ecosystem function.
The list of perceived environmental weeds in the region has been increasing rapidly in
recent times. Species lists on their own are, however, of limited land management use.
To enable a more efficient use of limited resources and to focus research and control
programs where they are likely to achieve the greatest environmental benefit requires
the development of an explicit system of environmental risk assessment and
prioritisation. Different types of strategies will be required for different categories of
risk. If species have been recognised as target weeds then prevention and early
intervention is possible, logistically feasible and cost effective.
A1: Page1
Purpose of the contract

To develop an environmental weed risk assessment system (RAS) for the Wet
Tropics region. The RAS will incorporate an ecologically based, logistically and
economically feasible system for identifying priorities for weed prevention,
eradication, containment or control. The emphasis is to be on gauging the potential
threat or environmental impact of weeds on World Heritage values and biodiversity.
It is envisioned that the approach to be taken will develop explicit
biogeographic/historical and biological/ecological criteria to assess the potential
environmental threat posed by a wide range of both presently occurring or potential
introductions to the region.
WTMA needs a robust RAS to help:
1.
prevent the development of new weed problems;
2.
reduce the impacts of existing weed problems of regional significance; and
3.
provide the decision-making framework for on-going management of the weed
problem.
Objectives
To establish a robust decision making model for strategic weed management through
the development of a targeted approach which will:
facilitate the collation of relevant reference materials
focus on a small proportion of the enormous pool of potential weeds
direct ecological and weed control research
enhance the probability of early detection and response
enable pro-active contingency planning and swift response
aid in the preparation of public awareness materials
determine WTMAs immediate to medium-term weed management priorities
and funding needs
Tasks
Develop a computer based environmental weed risk assessment system tailored to the
Wet Tropics region encompassing inventory, prioritisation, categorisation and
management action components.
Inventory
Develop a database of :
existing Wet Tropics environmental weeds
plants presently found in the region which are considered sleeper weeds
plants not presently in the region but which are proven environmental weeds
in similar environments elsewhere
Prioritisation
Develop a comprehensive set of explicit biogeographic/historical and
biological/ecological criteria and an associated weighting scheme to assess the
potential environmental threat posed by a wide range of both presently occurring or
likely introductions to the region.
A1: Page2
Categorisation
Develop a system that allows discriminate prioritisation of species into categories
applicable to a range of management purposes, such as prevention, eradication,
containment or control
Management Actions
'Management Actions' - Arriving at a 5-year costed program is a logical next stage
(phase 2) of a program once that the desk-top study of weed management
priorities/risk assessment has been completed. For a properly considered 5-year
costed management program to be forthcoming there would need to be more
expansive consultation with Land Protection and related personnel more familiar with
hands-on control techniques, changing availability of control chemicals and
registration protocols, developments in control investigations and distribution and
abundance of target species than is provided for in the current project time frame.
Moreover, there are many unknowables that would militate against this task - for
instance, the continually changing funding sources and conditions for control efforts,
failures to commit to recurrent expenditures that jeopardise initial allocations by not
funding follow-up control efforts, and the generally dynamic nature of weed risk.
In view of these factors it is argued that a 5-year costed program is beyond the scope
of the project at this stage, and instead it may be proposed that once the inventory,
prioritisation and management classification tasks have been completed, a first draft
of a Strategic Action Plan be developed for the WTWHA based on consideration of
control, containment and eradication options.
A1: Page3
Appendix 2 List of exotic plants that have naturalised within

the Wet Tropics Bioregion arranged alphabetically by family
(Source: Queensland Herbarium records (HERBRECS) to November 2000; emended by
concatenating conspecific subspecies/varieties (indicated by strikethrough), and inserting
additional species (in red font) otherwise known to have naturalised within the region)
Category
Family
Taxon
higher dicots
higher dicots
Acanthaceae
Acanthaceae
Asystasia gangetica
Barleria rosea
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
ferns
Acanthaceae
Acanthaceae
Acanthaceae
Acanthaceae
Acanthaceae
Acanthaceae
Acanthaceae
Acanthaceae
Acanthaceae
Acanthaceae
Acanthaceae
Acanthaceae
Acanthaceae
Adiantaceae
monocots
higher dicots
monocots
monocots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Agavaceae
Aizoaceae
Alismataceae
Alismataceae
Amaranthaceae
Amaranthaceae
Amaranthaceae
Amaranthaceae
Amaranthaceae
Amaranthaceae
Amaranthaceae
Amaranthaceae
Amaranthaceae
Amaryllidaceae
Anacardiaceae
Anacardiaceae
Anacardiaceae
Anacardiaceae
Barleria strigosa
Brillantaisia lamium
Crossandra infundibuliformis
Hemigraphis alternata
Justicia betonica
Odontonema tubaeforme
Ruellia malacosperma
Sanchezia parvibracteata
Stephanophysum longifolium
Thunbergia alata
Thunbergia grandiflora
Thunbergia laurifolia
Thunbergia mysorensis
Pityrogramma calomelanos var.
calomelanos
Sansevieria trifasciata
Galenia pubescens
Sagittaria graminea
Sagittaria graminea var. platyphylla
Alternanthera bettzickiana
Alternanthera dentata
Alternanthera ficoidea
Amaranthus hybridus
Amaranthus spinosus
Amaranthus viridis
Celosia argentea
Gomphrena celosioides
Zephyranthes grandiflora
Anacardium occidentale
Harpephyllum caffrum
Mangifera indica
Schinus terebinthifolia
lower dicots
lower dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Annonaceae
Annonaceae
Apiaceae
Apocynaceae
Apocynaceae
Apocynaceae
Annona glabra
Annona reticulata
Cyclospermum leptophyllum
Allamanda blanchettii
Allamanda cathartica
Cascabela thevetia
higher dicots
higher dicots
monocots
monocots
monocots
Apocynaceae
Apocynaceae
Araceae
Araceae
Araceae
Catharanthus roseus
Chonemorpha fragrans
Aglaonema commutatum
Colocasia esculenta
Epipremnum aureum
monocots
monocots
Araceae
Arecaceae
Syngonium podophyllum
Syagrus romanzoffiana
lower dicots
lower dicots
lower dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Aristolochiaceae
Aristolochiaceae
Aristolochiaceae
Asclepiadaceae
Asclepiadaceae
Asclepiadaceae
Aristolochia elegans
Aristolochia odoratissima
Aristolochia ringens
Asclepias curassavica
Calotropis gigantea
Calotropis procera
Comments
Ornamental (noted to be naturalising by
Boorman, pers. comm.)
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental pondweed
Ornamental pondweed
Alligator Weed a WONS
Ornamental
Fruit tree (Cashew Nut)
Fruit tree
Ornamental naturalising about
Herberton area (pers. obs)
Root stock for fruit tree WONS
Fruit tree (Custard Apple)
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental naturalising in various
places throughout region (pers. obs)
Ornamental
?ornamental
Food plant
Ornamental syn. Scindapsis aurea
listed by Qld Herbarium as doubtfully
naturalised but frequently encourtered
Ornamental
Ornamental invasive of mixed forest
along Priors Ck, Atherton (pers. obs)
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
?ornamental
A2: Page 1
Category
Family
Taxon
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Asclepiadaceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Gomphocarpus physocarpus
Acanthospermum hispidum
Ageratina riparia (syn. Eupatorium.
riparium)
Ageratum conyzoides subsp. conyzoides
Ageratum houstonianum
Ambrosia artemisiifolia
Arctotheca calendula
Aster subulatus
Bidens alba var. radiata
Bidens pilosa var. pilosa
Carpesium cernuum
Centaurea melitensis
Centratherum punctatum
Chromolaena odorata
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Cichorium intybus
Cirsium vulgare
Conyza bonariensis
Conyza canadensis var. canadensis
Conyza canadensis var. pusilla
Conyza leucantha
Conyza sumatrensis
Cosmos caudatus
Crassocephalum crepidioides
Elephantopus mollis
Eleutheranthera ruderalis
Emilia sonchifolia var. javanica
Emilia sonchifolia var. sonchifolia
Erechtites valerianifolia forma valerianifolia
Eupatorium catarium (syn. Praxelis
clematidea)
Galinsoga parviflora
Gamochaeta pensylvanica
Hypochaeris radicata
Mikania micrantha
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Montanoa hibiscifolia
Parthenium hysterophorus
Pseudelephantopus spicatus
Sigesbeckia orientalis
Silybum marianum
Solidago canadensis var. scabra
Sonchus oleraceus
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Synedrella nodiflora
Tagetes minuta
Tithonia rotundifolia
Tridax procumbens
Xanthium occidentale
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Balsaminaceae
Basellaceae
Bignoniaceae
Bignoniaceae
Bignoniaceae
Bignoniaceae
Bixaceae
Boraginaceae
Boraginaceae
Brassicaceae
Brassicaceae
Brassicaceae
Brassicaceae
Brassicaceae
Brassicaceae
Brassicaceae
Impatiens walleriana
Anredera cordifolia
Macfadyena unuis-cati
Parmentiera aculeata
Tecoma capensis
Bixa orellana
Echium plantagineum
Heliotropium indicum
Brassica juncea
Brassica nigra
Brassica rapa subsp. sylvestris
Cardamine flexuosa
Coronopus didymus
Coronopus integrifolius
Lepidium virginicum
Comments
note nomenclatural change
Bluetop/Billygoat Weed
as above
Ornamental
considered to be one of the worlds

worse weeds quarantine weed
target of SWEEP
Food plant
Ornamental
Brazilian Fireweed
Mistflower note change in taxonomic
nomenclature
Medicinal herb one of the worlds

worst invasives controlled in
Bramston Beach area
Ornamental
Pasture seed contaminant WONS
Goldenrod
Ornamental bank stabiliser
Singapore Daisy = Wedelia trilobata
Cinderalla weed
Ornamental
Ornamental
Noogoora Burr injurious fruits
= X. pungens
Ornamental
Ornamental
Cats-claw creeper - ornamental
Cucumber Tree = P. edulis
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental honey plant
A2: Page 2
Category
Family
Taxon
Comments
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
monocots
higher dicots
lower dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Brassicaceae
Brassicaceae
Brassicaceae
Bromeliaceae
Buddlejaceae
Cabombaceae
Cactaceae
Cactaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpiniaceae
Caesalpineaceae
Raphanus raphanistrum
Rorippa palustris
Sisymbrium thellungii
Ananas comosus
Buddleja madagascariensis
Cabomba caroliniana
Opuntia vulgaris
Pereskia aculeata
Bauhinia monandra
Caesalpinia decapetala
Cassia fistula
Cassia grandis
Chamaecrista rotundifolia
Gliricidia sepium
Haematoxylum campechianum
Senna alata
Senna hirsuta
Senna obtusifolia
Senna occidentalis
Senna septemptrionalis
Senna siamea
Senna tora
Sindora supa
Tamarindus indica
Food plant
higher dicots
higher dicots
monocots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
monocots
monocots
monocots
Campanulaceae
Cannabaceae
Cannaceae
Capparaceae
Capparaceae
Capparaceae
Capparaceae
Caprifoliaceae
Caprifoliaceae
Caprifoliaceae
Caricaceae
Caryophyllaceae
Caryophyllaceae
Chenopodiaceae
Clusiaceae
Clusiaceae
Commelinaceae
Commelinaceae
Commelinaceae
Hippobroma longiflora
Cannabis sativa
Canna indica
Cleome aculeata
Cleome gynandra
Cleome hassleriana
Cleome monophylla
Lonicera japonica
Lonicera periclymenum
Sambucus canadensis
Carica papaya
Cerastium vulgare
Stellaria media
Chenopodium ambrosioides
Garcinia xanthchymus
Commelina benghalensis
Tradescantia spathacea
Zebrina pendula
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Convolvulaceae
Convolvulaceae
Convolvulaceae
Convolvulaceae
Convolvulaceae
Convolvulaceae
Convolvulaceae
Convolvulaceae
Convolvulaceae
Convolvulaceae
Convolvulaceae
Convolvulaceae
Convolvulaceae
Convolvulaceae
Crassulaceae
Crassulaceae
Cucurbitaceae
Cucurbitaceae
Cucurbitaceae
Cucurbitaceae
Argyreia nervosa
Cuscuta campestris
Ipomoea caraica
Ipomoea hederifolia
Ipomoea indica
Ipomoea nil
Ipomoea obscura
Ipomoea purpurea
Ipomoea quamoclit
Ipomoea triloba
Merremia dissecta
Merremia quinquefolia
Merremia tuberosa
Turbina corymbosa
Bryophyllum daigremontianum
Bryophyllum pinnatum
Coccinia grandis
Cucumis anguria
Cucumis metuliferus
Momordica charantia
higher dicots
monocots
monocots
Cyperaceae
Cyperaceae
Cyperaceae
Cyperus aromaticus
Cyperus brevifolius
Cyperus compressus
Food plant (Pineapple)

Ornamental
Aquarium escapee
Food plant formerly greatly invasive
Ornamental invasive in region
Forage legume
Sicklepod - major agricultural weed
Fruit-bearing plant (Tamarind) longestablished in Australia from

Maccassan trader times
grown for psychotropic properties
Canna Lily ornamental
Japanese honeysuckle - ornamental

?ornamental
Food plant
Chickweed
Ornamental invasive of gullies in and

about urban areas (pers. obs)
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental/drug plant
?ornamental widespread and rampant

along forest edges (pers. obs)
Navua sedge lawn contaminant
A2: Page 3
Category
Family
Taxon
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Cyperaceae
Cyperaceae
Cyperaceae
Cyperaceae
Cyperaceae
Cyperaceae
Dioscoreaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Euphorbiaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Cyperus esculentus
Cyperus involucratus
Cyperus metzii
Cyperus rotundus
Cyperus tuberosus
Eleocharis minuta
Dioscorea alata
Acalypha wilkesiana
Chamaesyce hirta
Chamaesyce hyssopifolia
Chamaesyce maculata
Chamaesyce prostrata
Euphorbia cyathophora
Euphorbia heterophylla
Hevea brasiliensis
Jatropha curcas
Jatropha gossypiifolia
Manihot esculenta
Manihot glaziovii
Pedilanthus tithymaloides subsp. smallii
Phyllanthus amarus
Phyllanthus tenellus
Aeschynomene americana
Aeschynomene americana var. americana
Aeschynomene indica
Aeschynomene micranthos
Aeschynomene villosa
Alysicarpus bupleurifolius
Alysicarpus ovalifolius
Alysicarpus vaginalis
Cajanus cajan
Calopogonium mucunoides
Centrosema pascuorum
Centrosema pubescens
Clitoria laurifolia
Clitoria ternatea
Crotalaria goreensis
Crotalaria incana subsp. purpurascens
Crotalaria lanceolata subsp. lanceolata
Crotalaria lunata
Crotalaria ochroleuca
Crotalaria pallida var. obovata
Crotalaria retusa
Crotalaria spectabilis
Crotalaria virgulata subsp. grantiana
Crotalaria zanzibarica
Dalbergia sissoo
Desmodium heterophyllum
Desmodium incanum
Desmodium intortum
Desmodium scorpiurus
Desmodium strigillosum
Desmodium tortuosum
Desmodium uncinatum
Glycine max
Indigofera spicata
Indigofera suffruticosa
Indigofera tinctoria
Inga sp.
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Lablab purpureus
Lupinus albus
Macroptilium atropurpureum
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Macroptilium lathyroides var. semierectum

Macrotyloma axillare
Macrotyloma axillare var. axillare
Macrotyloma uniflorum
Macrotyloma uniflorum var. stenocarpum
Macrotyloma uniflorum var. uniflorum
Comments
Food plant
Ornamental
Rubber
Food plant
Food plant
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume (Butterfly Pea)
Ornamental
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Fruit tree recored as invasive by

Stanton (pers. comm.)
Pasture legume
Pasture legume widespread in region
in disturbed localities (pers. obs)
Pasture legume
A2: Page 4
Category
Family
Taxon
Comments
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fagaceae
Flacourtiaceae
Hydrocharitaceae
Medicago lacinata var. lacinata

Medicago lupulina
Medicago polymorpha
Melilotus indicus
Neonotonia wightii
Neonotonia wightii var. wightii
Pachyrhizus erosus
Phaseolus lunatus
Pueraria lobata
Pueraria phaseoloides
Pueraria phaseoloides var. javanica
Stylosanthes guianensis
Stylosanthes guianensis var. guineensis
Stylosanthes guianensis var. intermedia
Stylosanthes hamata
Stylosanthes humilis
Stylosanthes scabra
Tephrosia candida
Tephrosia elegans
Tephrosia noctiflora
Tephrosia tinctoria
Teramnus labialis
Trifolium glomeratum
Vigna adenantha
Vigna hosei
Vigna mungo
Vigna parkeri
Vigna umbellata
Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata subsp. cylindrica
Vigna unguiculata subsp. dekindtiana
Quercus robur
Flacourtia jangomas
Elodea canadensis
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
lower dicots
lower dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Lauraceae
Lauraceae
Lythraceae
Lythraceae
Malpighiaceae
Malvaceae
Malvaceae
Malvaceae
Malvaceae
Malvaceae
Malvaceae
Malvaceae
Malvaceae
Malvaceae
Malvaceae
Malvaceae
Malvaceae
Marantaceae
Clerodendrum heterophyllum forma baueri

Clerodendrum paniculatum
Clerodendrum thomsoniae
Hyptis capitata
Hyptis pectinata
Hyptis rhomboidea
Hyptis suaveolens
Leonurus sibiricus
Leucas decemdentata
Leucas linifolia
Leucas zeylanica
Ocimum americanum var. americanum
Ocimum x citriodorum
Salvia coccinea
Salvia misella
Stachys arvensis
Cinnamomum camphora
Persea americana
Ammannia auriculata
Rotala rotundifolia
Hiptage benghalensis
Abelmoschus manihot subsp. manihot
Abelmoschus manihot subsp. tetraphyllus
Gossypium barbadense
Hibiscus diversifolius
Hibiscus mutabilis
Hibiscus rosasinensis
Malvastrum coromandelianum
Sida acuta
Sida rhombifolia
Sida rhombifolia var. incana
Sida spinosa
Urena lobata
Thaumatococcus daniellii
Pasture legume (Phasey Bean)

Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Passture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Pasture legume
Ornamental/timber tree (Oak)
Ornamental pondweed recorded only
recently from Mazlin Ck (unpub. data)
Ornamental
Timber tree
Fruit tree
now includes H. mandablota

Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Food plant noted by Stanton (pers.

comm.) as invasive in Whyanbeel area
A2: Page 5
Category
Family
Taxon
Comments
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Melastomataceae
Melastomataceae
Meliaceae
Miconia calvescens
Tristemma mauritianum var. mauritianum
Azadirachta indica
Ornamental
higher dicots
Meliaceae
Chukrasia velutina
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Mimosaceae
Mimosaceae
Mimosaceae
Mimosaceae
Mimosaceae
Mimosaceae
Mimosaceae
Mimosaceae
Mimosaceae
Mimosaceae
Mimosaceae
Mimoscaeae
Acacia angustissima
Acacia farnesiana
Acacia sinuata
Calliandra surinamensis
Leucaena leucocephala subsp. leucocephala
Mimosa diplotricha var. diplotricha
Mimosa pudica
Mimosa pudica var. hispida
Mimosa pudica var. tetrandra
Mimosa pudica var. unijuga
Samanea saman
Acacia nilotica
higher dicots
higher dicots
Molluginaceae
Moraceae
Mollugo verticillata
Artocarpus ?communis
higher dicots
higher dicots
monocots
higher dicots
Moraceae
Moringaceae
Musaceae
Myrsinaceae
Castilla elastica
Moringa pterygosperma
Musa acuminata x M.balbisiana
Ardisia cf .humilis
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Myrsinaceae
Myrsinaceae
Myrsinaceae
Myrtaceae
Ardisia crenata
Ardisia crispa
Ardisia solanacea
Eugenia dombeyi
higher dicots
Myrtaceae
Eugenia uniflora
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
?higher dicots
Myrtaceae
Myrtaceae
Myrtaceae
Oleaceae
Onagraceae
Onagraceae
Oxalidaceae
Oxalidaceae
Passifloraceae
Passifloraceae
Passifloraceae
Passifloraceae
Passifloraceae
Passifloraceae
Passifloraceae
Passifloraceae
Passifloraceae
Passifloraceae
Passifloraceae
Phytolaccaceae
Phytolaccaceae
Pinaceae
Psidium guajava
Psidium guineense
Syzygium cumini
Ligustrum sinense
Ludwigia peploides subsp. montevidensis
Oenothera speciosa
Oxalis corniculata var. corniculata
Oxalis debilis var. corymbosa
Passiflora caerulea
Passiflora coccinea
Passiflora edulis
Passiflora foetida
Passiflora foetida var. foetida
Passiflora foetida var. gossypifolia
Passiflora foetida var. riparia
Passiflora laurifolia
Passiflora quadrangularis
Passiflora suberosa
Passiflora subpeltata
Phytolacca octandra
Rivina humilis
Pinus caribaea
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
monocots
Piperaceae
Plantaginaceae
Plantaginaceae
Poaceae
Peperomia pellucida
Plantago lanceolata
Plantago major
Andropogon gayanus
monocots
monocots
Poaceae
Poaceae
Arundo donax var. donax

Axonopus compressus
Imported for a range of uses (especially

for insect repellant) invasive in
limited area (Speewah)
Timber tree wildings establishing
from plantation parents on Atherton
Tableland (pers. obs)
Ornamental
Pasture legume
now includes M. invisa
Ornamental
a WONS occasionally encountered in
drier parts of region
Jackfruit noted as invasive in Cairns
area by Boorman (pers. comm.)
Provides rubber substitute
Fruit-bearing plant
Ornamental - if A. humilis it is a major
weed elsewhere but may be confused
with A. solanacea (see below Hyland
& Waterhouse pers. comm.)
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Fruit-bearing plant noted naturalising
by Stanton (peres. comm.)
Fruit-bearing plant recorded in intact
native vegetation at various locations
(eg, Cardwell see Werren 1998)
Fruit tree
?fruit tree
Fruit tree (Java Plum)
Ornamental
Ornamental
Fruit-bearing plant
?ornamental
Timber tree wildings extensively
established around numerous
plantations (pers. obs)
Pasture grass (Gamba Grass) known to

be naturalising within region
(Waterhouse pers. comm.)
A2: Page 6
Category
Family
Taxon
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Axonopus fissifolius
Bambusa vulgaris
Bothriochloa insculpta
Brachiaria brizantha
Brachiaria decumbens Stapf
Brachiaria decumbens Stapf cv Basilisk
Brachiaria humidicola
Brachiaria mutica
Cenchrus caliculatus
Cenchrus ciliaris
Cenchrus echinatus
Cenchrus setiger
Chloris gayana
Chloris inflata
Chloris virgata
Cynodon aethiopicus
Cynodon nlemfuensis var. nlemfuensis
Cyrtococcum deltoideum
Dactyloctenium aegyptium
Dactyloctenium australe
Dichanthium annulatum
Dichanthium aristatum
Dichanthium caricosum
Digitaria ciliaris
Digitaria didactyla
Digitaria eriantha
Digitaria violascens
Echinochloa colona
Echinochloa crus-galli
Echinochloa frumentacea
Echinochloa polystachya
Echinochloa polystachya cv. Amity
Eleusine indica
Eragrostis amabilis
Eragrostis cilianensis
Eragrostis minor
Eragrostis pilosa
Eragrostis subsecunda
Eragrostis tenuifolia
Eriochloa meyeriana
Eustachys distichophylla
Hordeum vulgare subsp. Vulgare
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Hyparrhenia hirta
Hyparrhenia rufa
Hyparrhenia rufa subsp. altissima
Hyparrhenia rufa subsp. rufa
Lolium perenne
Lolium x hubbardii
Lolium x hybridum
Melinis minutiflora
Melinis repens
Panicum coloratum
Panicum maximum var. coloratum
Panicum maximum var. maximum
Panicum maximum var. maximum cv
Coloniao
Panicum maximum var. maximum cv. Hamil
Panicum maximum var. trichoglume
Paspalum conjugatum
Paspalum dilatatum
Paspalum notatum
Paspalum paniculatum
Paspalum plicatulum
Paspalum urvillei
Paspalum virgatum
Comments
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture (ponded) grass (Para Grass)
Pasture grass
Pasture grass (Buffel Grass)
Pasture grass (Rhodes Grass)

Pasture grass
inclusive of Amity cultivar
Pasture (ponded) grass (Hymenachne)

a WONS - recorded extensively from
Babinda to the Herbert floodplain in the
east and further to the west from
Julatten to Mareeba
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass (Guinea Grass)
Pasture grass
Pasture grass (Hamel Grass)
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass (Clyde River Grass)
A2: Page 7
Category
Family
Taxon
Comments
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Paspalum wettsteinii
Pennisetum alopecuroides
Pennisetum clandestinum
Pennisetum glaucum
Pennisetum pedicellatum subsp. unispiculum
Pennisetum purpureum
Phalaris canariensis
Phalaris minor
Phyllostachys bambusoides
Poa annua
Saccharum officinarum
Saccharum spontaneum
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Setaria pumila subsp. pallidefusca

Setaria pumila subsp. pumila
Setaria sphacelata
Setaria sphacelata var. sericea
Setaria sphacelata var. splendida
Sorghum bicolor
Sorghum halepense
Sorghum x almum
Sporobolus africanus
Sporobolus jacquemontii
Sporobolus pyramidalis var. natalensis
monocots
monocots
monocots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Polygalaceae
Polygonaceae
Polygonaceae
Polygonaceae
Polygonaceae
Themeda quadrivalvis
Urochloa mosambicus
Zea mexicana
Polygala paniculata
Acetosella vulgaris
Emex australis
Fallopia convolvulus
Triplaris americana/surinamensis
monocots
higher dicots
higher dicots
ferns
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Pontederiaceae
Portulacaceae
Primulaceae
Pteridaceae
Rhamnaceae
Rosaceae
Rubiaceae
Rubiaceae
Talinum paniculatum
Anagallis pumila
Pteris semipinnata
Ziziphus mauritiana
Rubus alceifolius
Coffea arabica
Coffea liberica
higher dicots
higher dicots
Rubiaceae
Rubiaceae
Mitracarpus hirtus
Musenda frondosa
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
Rubiaceae
Rubiaceae
Rubiaceae
Rubiaceae
Rubiaceae
Rutaceae
Rutaceae
Rutaceae
Rutaceae
Oldenlandia corymbosa var. corymbosa

Richardia brasiliensis
Richardia scabra
Spermococe assurgens
Spermococe mauritiana
Casimiroa edulis
Citrus x limon
Murraya koenigii
Murraya paniculata
ferns
higher dicots
Salviniaceae
Sapindaceae
Salvinia molesta
Blighia sapida
higher dicots
higher dicots
Sapindaceae
Sapindaceae
higher dicots
Sapotaceae
Cardiospermum halicacabum
Cardiospermum halicacabum var.
halicacabum
Chrysophyllum cainito
Ornamental + other
food plant (Sugar Cane)
listed as doubtfully naturalised by Qld
Herbarium but known locally to be
somewhat invasive (pers. obs)
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture grass
Pasture contaminant - Giant Rats-tail

Grass recorded by Sullivan on
Tablelands (Little, pers. comm.)
Pasture seed contaminant
Food plant
Ornamental featured in Cairns City

PMP invasive about Bramston Beach
Ornamental pondweed
Ornamental
Food plant (Chinee Apple)
Food plant
Food plant -listed as doubtfully
naturalised by Qld Herbarium but
recored as naturalising (Stanton, pers.
comm, Boorman, Pers. comm.)
shrubby garden escapee along
powerline corridor on the approaches to
Bramston Beach (Jensen, pers. comm.)
Fruiy-bearing tree
Fruiy-bearing tree (Lemon)
Food plant (curry leaf)
Ornamental inclusive of M.paniculata
cv. exotica
Ornamental aquatic
Fruit-bearing tree naturalising along
creek banks and forest edges along
footslopes of the McAlister Range west
of Palm Cove (Small, pers. comm.)
Fruit-bearing tree recorded by Stanton

(pers. comm.) as naturalising
A2: Page 8
Category
Family
Taxon
higher dicots
higher dicots
Scrophulariaceae
Scrophulariaceae
Angelonia salicariifolia
Lophospermum erubescens
higher dicots
higher dicots
spike mosses
spike mosses
spike mosses
spike mosses
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
higher dicots
monocots
monocots
monocots
monocots
Scrophulariaceae
Scrophulariaceae
Selaginellaceae
Selaginellaceae
Selaginellaceae
Selaginellaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Solanaceae
Theaceae
Tiliaceae
Tiliaceae
Tiliaceae
Urticaceae
Urticaceae
Verbenaceae
Verbenaceae
Verbenaceae
Verbenaceae
Verbenaceae
Verbenaceae
Verbenaceae
Verbenaceae
Verbenaceae
Verbenaceae
Zingiberaceae
Zingiberaceae
Zingiberaceae
Zingiberaceae
Mecardonia procumbens
Scoparia dulcis
Selaginella plana
Selaginella umbrosa
Selaginella vogelii
Selaginella wildenovii
Brugmansia x candida
Capsicum annuum var. glabriusculum
Capsicum frutescens
Datura stramonium
Lycium barbarum
Lycopersicon esculentum
Nicandra physalodes
Nicotiana glauca
Physalis peruviana
Solanum capsicoides
Solanum erianthum
Solanum mauritianum
Solanum nigrum
Solanum pseudocapsicum
Solanum seaforthianum
Solanum torvum
Camellia sinensis
Muntingia calabura
Triumfetta pilosa
Triumfetta rhomboidea
Boehmeria nivea
Pilea microphylla
Duranta erecta
Lantana camara var. camara
Lantana montevidensis
Stachytarpheta cayennensis
Stachytarpheta jamaicensis
Stachytarpheta mutabilis
Stachytarpheta x adulterina
Stachytarpheta x trimenii
Verbena incompta
Verbena litoralis
Alpinia zerumbet
Costus dubius
Hedychium coronarium
Zingiber officinale
Comments
Rampant along road verges of Maalan
circuit (Jensen, pers. comm.) and along
the Beatrice (Small, pers. comm.)
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Fruit-bearing plant
Fruit-bearing plant
Ornamental
Fruit-bearing plant
Drug plant
Fruit-bearing plant
Ornamental
Food (beverage) plant
Fruit tree
Ornamental syn. D. repens

Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
Ornamental
?ornamental
Ornamental
?ornamental
Food plant
A2: Page 9

Environmental Weeds of The Wet Tropics

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Environmental Weeds of The Wet Tropics

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

ENVIRONMENTAL WEEDS OF THE WET TROPICS

BIOREGION: RISK ASSESSMENT & PRIORITY RANKING

Report prepared for the Wet Tropics Management Authority, Cairns

Rainforest CRC January 2001

Wet Tropics Weed Risk Assessment

Rainforest CRC January 2001

peer review and sensitivity testing of the Wet Tropics RAS;

procuring additional biological/ecological information on the remaining

mapping of infestations especially high scoring weeds with comparatively

formulation of a secondary screening system to explicitly take into account

Wet Tropics Weed Risk Assessment

Rainforest CRC January 2001